Tea Party Express – Health Care Protests – 35 Stops Nationwide

Glenn Beck – A Revolution Of Radical Communists–Maxine Waters

Glenn Beck – A Revolution Of Radical Communists – Van Jones

Glen Beck: Obama’s Brown Shirts

Officer Does Not Like anti-Obama Poster: “It ain’t [America] no more, OK?”

“…This video was taken on Tuesday, August 25th, 2009 at Rep. Jim Moran’s (D-VA) Town Hall meeting on Obama Deathcare (Howie Dean was there too) held at South Lakes High School in Reston, VA.

Many people were left outside when the school filled to capacity. School security officer Wesley Cheeks, Jr. did not like my anti-Obamacare poster which used one of the gone-viral “Joker” graphics.

When I said to Officer Cheeks, “This used to be America!” his response was: “It ain’t no more, OK?”

I feel sorry for Officer Cheeks. He, like many African-Americans are being played by the racist Obama administration. Wake up people. They used to want you only for your votes, but now with the huge hispanic illegals pouring in they won’t even need you for that. Watch those inner city abortion clinics get stimulated though. Democrat and church leaders sure seem to have time and money to build those.”

The American people are waking up to the hidden agenda of the progressive radical socialists Democratic Party led by Barack Obama and funded by George Soros, Wall Street bankers, unions, trial lawyers, and big business.

Join the Tea Party Express!

In or Out in 2010

Write your elected Representative and Senator and ask him or her where they stand on the issues:

Dear Mr. Politician, yes or no:

1. I believe in a balanced budget and therefore will vote for a freeze in government spending until that goal is realized.

2. I believe government should not increase the financial burden on its citizenry during difficult economic times therefore I will oppose all tax increases until our economy has rebounded.

3. I believe more than four decades of U.S. dependence on foreign oil is a travesty therefore I will support an energy plan that calls for immediately increasing usage of all domestic resources including nuclear energy, natural gas, and coal as necessary.

4. I believe in the sovereignty and security of our country and therefore will support measures to close our borders except for designated immigration points so we will know who is entering and why and I will vehemently oppose any measure giving another country, the United Nations, or any other entity, power over U.S. citizens.

5. I believe the United States of America is the greatest country on earth and therefore will not apologize for policies or actions which have served to free more and feed more people around the world than any other nation on the planet.

If your politician doesn’t believe, support or reflect these beliefs in their actions (not the little words they say), then they aren’t supporting you. More importantly, they aren’t supporting, protecting or defending the Constitution and it’s time to vote the bums out.

LOL

Ted Kennedy & The Health Care Town Halls

Background Articles and Videos

57% Would Like to Replace Entire Congress

“…If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.

Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.

There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it’s not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out. …”

“…While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.

Republicans, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly support replacing everyone in the Congress. Their views have not changed. But Republican voters are disenchanted with their team as much as the Congress itself: 69% of GOP Voters say Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the party base. …”

Thanks to KABC, there’s audio of Watson heaping praise on Castro, Guevara, and the Cuban health system at her town hall meeting last night — as well as injecting her usual racial poison into the health care debate. (For a reminder of what Cuban health care is really like, click here.)

wrote up a transcript of her remarks. Bring an airsickness bag before reading: …”

goodbye Ted Kennedy -Your deeds spoke for you.

Will We Really Miss Ted Kennedy?

Michael Savage – Ted Kennedy Worked with the Leader of the Soviet Union

A Unique Senator

Michael Savage – Übermensch (Ted Kennedy) Passes the “Dorch”

Ted Kennedy on Health Care

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

The Real Ted Kennedy a two bit drunk

Dead Kennedys – We’ve got a Bigger Problem Now

Background Articles and Videos

Ted Kennedy was a ‘collaborationist’

“…One of the documents, a KGB report to bosses in the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee, revealed that “In 1978, American Sen. Edward Kennedy requested the assistance of the KGB to establish a relationship” between the Soviet apparatus and a firm owned by former Sen. John Tunney (D.-Calif.). KGB recommended that they be permitted to do this because Tunney’s firm was already connected with a KGB agent in France named David Karr. This document was found by the knowledgeable Russian journalist Yevgenia Albats and published in Moscow’s Izvestia in June 1992.

Another KGB report to their bosses revealed that on March 5, 1980, John Tunney met with the KGB in Moscow on behalf of Sen. Kennedy. Tunney expressed Kennedy’s opinion that “nonsense about ‘the Soviet military threat’ and Soviet ambitions for military expansion in the Persian Gulf . . . was being fueled by [President Jimmy] Carter, [National Security Advisor Zbigniew] Brzezinski, the Pentagon and the military industrial complex.”

Kennedy offered to speak out against President Carter on Afghanistan. Shortly thereafter he made public speeches opposing President Carter on this issue. This document was found in KGB archives by Vasiliy Mitrokhin, a courageous KGB officer, who copied documents from the files and then defected to the West. He wrote about this document in a February 2002 paper on Afghanistan that he released through the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson Center.

In May 1983, the KGB again reported to their bosses on a discussion in Moscow with former Sen. John Tunney. Kennedy had instructed Tunney, according to the KGB, to carry a message to Yuri Andropov, the General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, expressing Kennedy’s concern about the anti-Soviet activities of President Ronald Reagan. The KGB reported “in Kennedy’s opinion the opposition to Reagan remains weak. Speeches of the President’s opponents are not well-coordinated and not effective enough, and Reagan has the chance to use successful counterpropaganda.” Kennedy offered to “undertake some additional steps to counter the militaristic, policy of Reagan and his campaign of psychological pressure on the American population.” Kennedy asked for a meeting with Andropov for the purpose of “arming himself with the Soviet leader’s explanations of arms control policy so he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S.” He also offered to help get Soviet views on the major U.S. networks and suggested inviting “Elton Rule, ABC chairman of the board, or observers Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters to Moscow.”

Tunney also told the KGB that Kennedy was planning to run for President in the 1988 elections. “At that time, he will be 56 years old, and personal problems that have weakened his position will have been resolved [Kennedy quietly settled a divorce suit and soon plans to remarry].” Of course the Russians understood his problem with Chappaquiddick. While Kennedy did not intend to run in 1984, he did not exclude the possibility that the Democratic Party would draft him because “not a single one of the current Democratic hopefuls has a real chance of beating Reagan.”

This document was first discovered in the Soviet archives by London Times reporter Tim Sebastian and a report on it was published in that newspaper in February 1992. …”

The Kennedy-KGB connection

By Michelle Malkin

“…Bryan Preston digs deeper in an interview today with author Paul Kengor about that reported translated memo from the KGB archives, dated May 14, 1983, that describes an offer made to the KGB on behalf of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) by former Senator John Tunney (D-CA), a fellow Democrat and close friend of Kennedy’s. Listen here. …”

Among its most sensational aspects is a section detailing the domestic opposition to Reagan’s campaign for re-election in 1984 and his decision to deploy intermediate-range nuclear forces (INFs), Pershing II missiles, into Western Europe to counter the Soviet deployment of nuclear weapons across the Warsaw Pact. Specifically, Kengor includes what is purported to be a translated memo from the KGB archives, dated May 14, 1983, that describes an offer made to the KGB on behalf of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) by former Senator John Tunney (D-CA), a fellow Democrat and closefriend of Kennedy’s.

According to the document, Sen. Kennedy offered to help the Soviet leadership mount a media public relations campaign in the United States that would do two things. First, it would convince the American people that the Soviets intended peaceful co-existence with us. Second, it would undermine President Reagan’s efforts to deploy the Pershing IIs and build the Strategic Defense Initiative as well as undermining his national security stances and strategy on a broad basis, which in turn would dent Reagan’s campaign to be re-elected in 1984. In short, Sen. Kennedy was offering to work with USSR General Secretary Yuri Andropov against the President of the United States. …”

Cardiologists Crying Foul Over Medicare Cuts Hurt Obama Revamp

“…An Obama administration plan to cut Medicare payments to heart and cancer doctors by $1.4 billion next year is generating a backlash that’s undermining the president’s health-care overhaul.

While President Barack Obama and members of Congress have spent August debating health insurance and medical costs at public forums, specialists are waging what one advocate calls a “tooth and nail” fight against a separate initiative to boost the pay of family doctors, and cut fees for cardiologists and oncologists. The specialists, in newspaper columns and meetings with lawmakers, say patients will lose access to life-saving care, from pacemakers to chemotherapy.

The proposal by Medicare, the government insurer for the elderly and disabled, is an effort by Obama to focus U.S. medicine on preventive care. The fight by physicians who work with the most expensive patients is weakening support for Obama’s broader goal, legislation to remake the health system, said Mark B. McClellan, 46, a former Medicare chief. …”

Übermensch

“…The Übermensch (German; English: Overman, Superman) is a concept in the Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche posited the Übermensch as a goal for humanity to set for itself in his 1883 book Thus Spoke Zarathustra (German: Also Sprach Zarathustra).

The book’s protagonist, Zarathustra, contends that “man is something which ought to be overcome:”

All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment…

There is no consensus regarding the precise meaning of the Übermensch, or even the overall importance of the concept in Nietzsche’s thought. …”

“…The first translation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra into English, was by Alexander Tille, publlished in 1896. Tille translated Übermensch as Beyond-Man. In his translation published in 1909, Thomas Common rendered Übermensch as “Superman”; Common was anticipated in this by George Bernard Shaw, who did the same in his 1903 stage play Man and Superman. Walter Kaufmann lambasted this translation in the 1950s for failing to capture the nuance of the German über and for promoting an eventual puerile identification with the comic-book character Superman. His preference was to translate Übermensch as “overman.” Scholars continue to employ both terms, some simply opting to reproduce the German word.

The German prefix über can have connotations of superiority, transcendence, excessiveness, or intensity, depending on the words to which it is appended.[1]Mensch refers to a member of the human species, rather than to a man specifically. The adjective übermenschlich means superhuman, in the sense of beyond human strength or out of proportion to humanity. …”

Penn Jillette discusses health care on FOX’s Glenn Beck

Why Is Healthcare So Expensive?

Healthcare Reform Glenn Beck 7 23 2009

President Obama’s Health Insurance Reform initiative is a very sick joke.

One of the major drivers of rising health insurance premiums is the cost of defensive medicine and malpractice insurance resulting from trial laywers filing frivilous lawsuits and the lack limits or ceilings on damages in many states.

The Democratic Party will not mention or address this issue for the simple reason that one of their biggest campaign contributors are the trial lawyers in United States.

Doctors are fleeing states they have not enacted tort reform laws and going to states that have reformed their tort laws such as Texas.

As long as the Democrats control Congress and the Senate you will not see national tort reform which is badly needed to eliminate or at least diminish one of the major causes of out of control medical and health insurance costs.

The silence of the Democratic Party on this issue speaks for itself.

Give me a break Mr. President–you are bought and paid for by the trial lawyers.

Background Articles and Videos

Exposed: A trial lawyers’ pay-off in Obamacare

By Michelle Malkin

“…Walter Olson has the scoop on how Dems tried to stuff goodies for trial lawyers in the House Democrats’ health care takeover bill.

Republicans apparently stymied those efforts last week, but like the Terminator, they’ll be back.

Just before the House leadership’s 794-page health care reform bill went to a Ways & Means markup last Thursday, a remarkable provision was slipped in that amounts to one of the more audacious and far-reaching trial lawyer power grabs seen on Capitol Hill in a while. Republicans managed to fend it off for the moment–but don’t be surprised if it shows up again down the road in some form.

The provision would have drastically widened the scope of lawsuits against what are known as Medicare third-party defendants…

…The language slipped into the health bill would greatly expand the scope of these suits against third parties, while doing something entirely new, namely allow freelance lawyers to file them on behalf of the government–without asking permission–and collect rich bounties if they manage thereby to extract money from the defendants. Lawyers will recognize this as a “qui tam” procedure, of the sort that has led to a growing body of litigation filed by freelance bounty hunters against universities, defense contractors and others alleged to have overcharged the government.

Paul Simon – American Tune

“Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation. It is better be alone than in bad company. “

“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”

~ George Washington

Glenn Beck – Obama’s New Republic: SOLUTIONS 8/28/09 Part 1/5

Glenn Beck – Obama’s New Republic: SOLUTIONS 8/28/09 Part 2/5

Glenn Beck – Obama’s New Republic: SOLUTIONS 8/28/09 Part 3/5

Glenn Beck – Obama’s New Republic: SOLUTIONS 8/28/09 Part 4/5

Glenn Beck – Obama’s New Republic: SOLUTIONS 8/28/09 Part 5/5

Congratulations Glenn Beck for standing up for the American people.

Since the White House strongly objects to the title of Czar just call them Commissar.

The UN and the Federal Government WANT your guns

Glenn Beck Wayne LaPierre HR 2159 NRA Gun Control 2nd Amendment

Stephen Halbrook with CNN’s Lou Dobbs on Gun Control

Obama Pushes Anti Gun Treaty

Innocents betrayed

“…Mao Tse-Dung was arguably the most brutal dictator of the 20th century, and by extension all of history. My experimental documentary makes that argument. References come at the end. …”

THE GREAT LEAP BACKWARD

China Great Leap Forward Mao Zedong

“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”

“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

~George Washington

The Beatles – Revolution (STEREO)

Background Articles and Videos

The Great Leap Forward

“…The Great Leap Forward (sometimes pejoratively called the Great Leap Backward)(simplified Chinese: 大跃进; traditional Chinese: 大躍進; pinyin: Dàyuèjìn) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was an economic and social plan used from 1958 to 1961 which aimed to use China’s vast population to rapidly transform China from a primarily agrarian economy by peasant farmers into a modern communist society through the process of agriculturalization and industrialization. Mao Zedong based this program on the Theory of Productive Forces. It ended in catastrophe as it triggered a widespread famine that resulted in millions of deaths.[1]

“…Ironic considering its name, the Great Leap Forward is now widely seen, both within China and outside, as a major economic disaster, effectively being a “Great Leap Backward” that would affect China in the years to come. As inflated statistics reached planning authorities, orders were given to divert human resources into industry rather than agriculture. The official toll of excess deaths recorded in China for the years of the GLF is 14 million, but scholars have estimated the number of famine victims to be between 20 and 43 million [8].

The three years between 1959 and 1962 were known as the “Three Bitter Years” and the Three Years of Natural Disasters. Many local officials were tried and publicly executed for giving out misinformation[9].

Starting in the early 1980s, critics of the Great Leap added quantitative muscle to their arsenal. U.S. Government employee Judith Banister published what became an influential article in the China Quarterly, and since then estimates as high as 30 million deaths in the Great Leap became common in the U.S. press. However, Wim F Wertheim, emeritus professor from the University of Amsterdam, disagrees with the numbers presented on the basis that they lack scientific support.[10]. Critics of this position point to the numerous studies by individuals such as Aird in 1982, Ashton et al. in 1984, and Peng in 1987 that specifically sought to quantify the Great Leap’s demographic impact. A lingering problem that all scholars point to is the assumptions regarding birth rate used in the most widely cited projections of famine deaths. These assumptions make it difficult to precisely gauge the death toll with a high degree of accuracy. …”

“…After the death of Mao and the start of Chinese economic reform under Deng Xiaoping, the tendency within the Chinese government was to see the Great Leap Forward as a major economic disaster and to attribute it to the cult of personality under Mao Zedong, and to regard it as one of the serious errors he made after the founding of the PRC. ..”

Democide

“…Democide is a term coined by political scientist R. J. Rummel for “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.” Rummel created the term as an extended concept to include forms of government murder that are not covered by the legal definition of genocide, and it has found currency among other scholars.[1][2][3]

According to Rummel, genocide has three different meanings. The ordinary meaning is murder by government of people due to their national, ethnic, racial, or religious group membership. The legal meaning of genocide refers to the international treaty, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This also includes nonlethal acts that in the end eliminate the group, such as preventing births or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group. A generalized meaning of genocide is similar to the ordinary meaning but also includes government killings of political opponents or otherwise intentional murder. In order to avoid confusion over which meaning is intended, Rummel created the term democide for the third meaning.[4]

Rummel defines democide as “The murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder”. For example, government-sponsored killings for political reasons would be considered democide. Democide can also include deaths arising from “intentionally or knowingly reckless and depraved disregard for life”; this brings into account many deaths arising through various neglects and abuses, such as forced mass starvation. Rummel explicitly excludes battle deaths in his definition. Capital punishment, actions taken against armed civilians during mob action or riot, and the deaths of noncombatants killed during attacks on military targets so long as the primary target is military, are not considered democide.[5]

He has further stated: “I use the civil definition of murder, where someone can be guilty of murder if they are responsible in a reckless and wanton way for the loss of life, as in incarcerating people in camps where they may soon die of malnutrition, unattended disease, and forced labor, or deporting them into wastelands where they may die rapidly from exposure and disease.”

Some examples of democide cited by Rummel include the Great Purges carried out by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union (despite those people were executed), the deaths from the colonial policy in the Congo Free State, and Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward resulting in a famine which killed millions of people. According to Rummel, these were not cases of genocide, because those who were killed were not selected on the basis of their race, but were killed in large numbers as a result of government policies. Famine is classified by Rummel as democide if it fits the definition above.

For instance, Rummel only recently classified Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward as democide. He believed that Mao’s policies were largely responsible for the famine, but he was misled about it, and finally when he found out, he stopped it and changed his policies. Thus, according to Rummel, is not an intentional famine and thus not a democide. However, contradictory claims from Jung Chang and John Halliday’s controversial Mao: the Unknown Story allege that Mao knew about the famine from the beginning but didn’t care, and eventually Mao had to be stopped by a meeting of 7,000 top Communist Party members. Based on the book’s claims, Rummel now views the famine as intentional and a democide.

Beck has also received support from Sarah Palin, said Matea Gold in the Los Angeles Times. The former Alaska governor urged her 800,000-plus Facebook followers to watch his program to hear his insights on “who is actually running the White House.” And, with his ratings rising, Beck said on the air, “Even if the powers to be right now succeed in making me poor, drum me out—I will only be stronger for it.” …”

Sarah Palin has Glenn Beck’s back

By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist

“…Palin this week says on her Facebook page:

FOX News’ Glenn Beck is doing an extraordinary job this week walking America behind the scenes of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and outlining who is actually running the White House. Monday night he asked us to invite one friend to watch; tonight I invite all my friends to watch.”

Beck has gained attention in recent months as liberal groups try to convince advertisers not to pay to support his show.

They’ve had plenty of success, notably because of Beck’s “racist” comment and his stance that Obama has a “deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.”

As of Thursday, more than 16,000 people had used their Facebook accounts to say they liked what Palin had said about Beck.

And her comment on Beck had attracted more than 4,000 comments, most of them positive. …”

“Democrats can keep claiming all they want that illegal immigrants will not be covered in this bill. But their actions speak louder than their words. Democrats have rejected opportunities to close the gaping loopholes in this health care bill that will allow illegal immigrants to participate.

“If President Obama is committed to ensuring that illegal immigrants do not benefit from the bill – as he says he is – why not include the same verification mechanisms in this bill as already exist for other federal benefits programs?

“What’s more, the bill contains no provisions preventing illegal immigrants from participating in the Health Insurance Exchange that is to be created, including the government-run “public plan” that will be available through the federally-run and federally-subsidized Exchange. This is in direct conflict with the President’s claim that illegal immigrants will not be insured under his plan.

“The American people are more intelligent than the President gives them credit for. They understand that simply saying illegal immigrants can’t participate without providing verification is like putting a speed-limit sign on a road, then setting a policy that prohibits police from patrolling the road; it won’t stop speeders, and this bill won’t stop illegal immigrants from benefitting.”

BACKGROUND: IMMIGRATION LOOPHOLES IN HR 3200

Open access to Insurance Exchange: HR 3200 contains no provisions preventing illegal immigrants from participating in the Health Insurance Exchange that is to be created, including the government-run “public plan” that will be available through the federally-run and federally-subsidized Exchange.

According to CRS: “Under H.R. 3200, a ‘Health Insurance Exchange’ would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.”

No verification mechanism: Democrats point to language in the House bill that says illegal immigrants cannot get benefits. While that may be technically accurate, it is far from the truth.

The fact is that the statement is meaningless because the bill contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants do not receive benefits. Democrats defeated amendments in two congressional committees to close this loophole, including amendments that would use the very same verification mechanism that already exist in statute for other federal programs. Why not include the same verification mechanisms in this bill as already exist for other federal benefits programs? Without the requirement that there be a verification mechanism or a specific verification mechanism provided in statute, the Commissioner could determine that the eligibility requirements could be met either without verification or with as little as a signed attestation.

According to CRS: “Some have expressed concerns that since H.R. 3200 does not contain a mechanism to verify immigration status, the prohibitions on certain noncitizens (e.g, nonimmigrants and unauthorized aliens) receiving the credits may not be enforced. However, others note that under §142(a)(3) of the bill, it is the responsibility of the Health Choices Commissioner (Commissioner) to administer the “individual affordability credits under subtitle C of title II, including determination of eligibility for such credits.”

Family eligibility for affordability credits: Section 242(a)(2) of the bill provides that “[e]xcept as the Commissioner may otherwise provide, members of the same family who are affordable credit eligible individuals shall be treated as a single affordable credit individual eligible for the applicable credit for such a family under this subtitle.” This suggests that if one member of a family is legally eligible, every family member will be considered eligible. This is significant in terms of numbers — the Pew Hispanic Center estimated that there are almost two million families in the United States where illegal immigrant parents have U.S.-born children. That does not include other “mixed status families” – one legal parent, one illegal parent and illegal child, etc.

According to CRS: “There could be instances where some family members would meet the definition of an eligible individual for purposes of the credit, while other family members would not. For example, in a family consisting of a U.S. citizen married to an unauthorized alien and a U.S. citizen child, the U.S. citizen spouse and child could meet the criteria for being a credit-eligible individual, while the unauthorized alien spouse would not meet the criteria. H.R. 3200 does not expressly address how such a situation would be treated. Therefore, it appears that the Health Choices Commissioner would be responsible for determining how the credits would be administered in the case of mixed-status families.” …”

Commissar

“… Commissar is the English transliteration of an official title (Russian: комисса́р) used in Russia after the Bolshevik revolution.

The title was mostly associated with a number of Cheka and military functions in many Bolshevik and Soviet government military forces during the Russian Civil War; the White Army widely used the collective term bolsheviks and commissars for their opponents. After that, it was mostly used for People’s Commissar (or narkom) for government ministers, and political commissar in the military.

It is based on similar titles in a variety of languages (such as commissaire in French, Kommissar in German) most often attached to a criminal investigator in the police; they are usually translated as commissioner.

Thanks to KABC, there’s audio of Watson heaping praise on Castro, Guevara, and the Cuban health system at her town hall meeting last night — as well as injecting her usual racial poison into the health care debate. (For a reminder of what Cuban health care is really like, click here.)

wrote up a transcript of her remarks. Bring an airsickness bag before reading: …”

How to Bathe, Change and Feed a Baby : Tips for Changing Diapers of a Newborn Baby

Red Queen’s Race

The CIA good ol’ boy security background investigation of Barack Obama resulted in alarms going off in the White House.

President Obama, the red diaper baby, got do do and wee wee upped and ordered Attorney General, Eric Holder, to go after CIA employees to send them a message–the Chicago Way.

Now the good ol’ boys are striking back by expanding the security background investigations by including Obama’s progressive radical socialist network both inside and outside the government.

Looks like more than 100 far left progressive radical socialists are on the list working in the White House, the Executive Office building and many Departments and agencies.

The FBI better get the lead out before they are embarrassed by leaks to selected commentors and see live and in living color revelations of subversive activites.

Reminds me of the Soviet spy network penetration of the Roosevelt and Truman administrations.

Time for a diaper change.

Background Articles and Videos

CIA Counterterrorism Expert: Obama and Holder ‘At War’ with Agency

By: Kent Clizbe

“…In contrast, where was Eric Holder? Before leaving President Clinton’s employ, he orchestrated the pardons of several Puerto Rican separatist terrorists. Then in 2003, as a partner in the Washington law firm of Covington & Burling, Holder’s client, Chiquita Brands, admitted paying to support terrorist death squads in Colombia and paid a $25 million fine. During the time my friends worked to disrupt and destroy terrorist networks threatening America, Holder’s firm represented — for free — 16 terrorist detainees at Guantanamo.

Has he made any personal or professional sacrifices since his country was attacked in 2001? If he has, it is difficult to find them. When the special prosecutor comes calling, maybe someone from Covington & Burling can represent my colleagues for free, like they did for Lakhdar Boumedienne and 10 other terrorists in Gitmo.

The Holder/Obama Global War on the CIA (GWCIA) has only just begun, as it debuted with “grisly revelations” of revving drills, gunshots in the next cell, and threats against a terrorist’s children. The GWOT is not for the faint of heart, nor the queasy. No war ever has been. There may be slight improprieties stashed in the CIA’s closets, but the liberal-appeasing GWCIA is foolhardy and dangerous.

Mike Spann, was the first to die in the GWOT. He won’t have to worry about the Holder/Obama GWCIA. But others in the agency are very worried. While we sacrificed to achieve incremental victories, Holder and Obama plotted and schemed — not against those “evil-mongers” who killed our countrymen, but against those of us hunting the terrorists. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. The odor is not from Langley, Mr. Holder.”

Kent Clizbe is a former member of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations. In 2001, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, he returned to the CIA to serve multiple counter-terrorism deployments. In 2005, he was awarded the Intelligence Community Seal Medallion for his anti-terrorism work.

Obama Could Face Trouble Over CIA Investigation

Some think Holder’s naming of a prosecutor will contaminate Obama’s larger agenda

By Kenneth T. Walsh

“…The Obama administration has opened up a Pandora’s box of trouble for itself by moving ahead with an investigation of controversial interrogation practices of suspected terrorists that were used during George W. Bush’s administration. Attorney General Eric Holder named a special prosecutor to look into the allegations, but that won’t be the end of it. Washington insiders of both parties predict that congressional Democrats will now feel emboldened to pursue their own investigations into what many Democrats consider torture, complete with hearings and angry recriminations. “You know that Congress will want to throw its oar into the water,” says a former adviser to a GOP president and that, in the end, many people will be appalled by the probes. “Americans will consider this an effort to embarrass or punish people who were trying to protect us from those who were trying to hurt us. This won’t come out well.” He and other analysts predict that the hard feelings over the “torture investigations” will contaminate the debate in other areas, including healthcare, and undermine Obama’s larger agenda. …”

Obama’s CIA in turmoil; Panetta on the ledge; awaiting document dump

By Michelle Malkin

A “profanity-laced screaming match” at the White House involving CIA Director Leon Panetta, and the expected release today of another damning internal investigation, has administration officials worrying about the direction of its newly-appoint intelligence team, current and former senior intelligence officials tell ABC News.com.

Amid reports that Panetta had threatened to quit just seven months after taking over at the spy agency, other insiders tell ABCNews.com that senior White House staff members are already discussing a possible shake-up of top national security officials.

“You can expect a larger than normal turnover in the next year,” a senior adviser to Obama on intelligence matters told ABCNews.com.

…According to intelligence officials, Panetta erupted in a tirade last month during a meeting with a senior White House staff member. Panetta was reportedly upset over plans by Attorney General Eric Holder to open a criminal investigation of allegations that CIA officers broke the law in carrying out certain interrogation techniques that President Obama has termed “torture.”

Republicans who voted to confirm Holder now complain about Holder

By Michelle Malkin

Sen. Bon cluelessly explained that Holder was “a good listener.” As I reported at the time, 19 Bend Over Republicans joined the majority to install Holder as head of the Obama Justice Department. Let me refresh your memories:

Now, Sen. Bond and several others on this list are whining that Holder didn’t pay attention to their entreaties against appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the CIA. Just received the following letter to Holder from Bond and Company. So much for those good listening skills, eh? …”

Good ol’ boy

“…Good ol’ boy describes a system of social networking and perceptions alleged to exist prevalently among certain communities and social strata in the United States. Although the term originated in the South, these networks can be found throughout the U.S. and the rest of the Western world. It is typically taken to refer to informal legal, judicial, social, religious, business, and political associations among white males (“good ol’ boys”); however, in modern times can be composed of either or both sexes. In some areas, the good ol’ boy network is said to still exert considerable influence over many aspects of local government, business, and law enforcement. Usage of the term can often imply a wrongful exclusion of others from the network; however, often the emphasis is on inclusion of a member, as in, “doing a good ol’ boy a favor”.

Some negative effects of the good ol’ boy network are its exclusion of others, leading to leaders of a community possibly limiting business transactions to other elites, or to friends or acquaintances from within the network, to give friends better deals, and generally to reinforce traditional power structures over any other elements in the society.

Perceptions of religious and racial prejudice also endure, and the good ol’ boy network is sometimes seen as unique to WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants), with Catholics, Jews, and minority groups excluded. The network also functions like any other social network inasmuch as governmental, business, and professional connections and concessions often develop via mutual friendships and introductions established through the network. …”

“…The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is a civilian intelligence agency of the United States government.

It is an independent U.S. Government agency responsible for providing national security Intelligence (information gathering) to senior U.S. policymakers.

It is the successor of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) formed, during World War II, to coordinate espionage activities between the branches of the US military services. The National Security Act of 1947 established the CIA, affording it “no police or law enforcement functions, either at home or abroad.” One year later this mandate was expanded to include “sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures…. Subversion (and) assistance to underground resistance movements, guerrillas and refugee liberation movements, and support of indigenous anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world” [6]

Today, the CIA’s primary function is collecting, and analyzing information about foreign governments, corporations, and individuals which it uses to advise public policymakers. The agency conducts covert operations, paramilitary actions and exerts foreign political influence through its Special Activities Division. Prior to December 2004, the CIA was literally the central intelligence organization for the US government, charged with coordinating and overseeing not only its own activities, but also the activities of the intelligence community as a whole. The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 created the office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), who took over some of the government and intelligence community (IC)-wide functions that had previously been the CIA’s. The DNI manages the United States Intelligence Community and in so doing it manages the intelligence cycle. Among the functions that moved to the DNI were the preparation of estimates reflecting the consolidated opinion of the 16 IC agencies, and preparation of briefings for the president.

2004 was a critical year in the history of the CIA, as there is a marked difference between the agency as it was during the period that it bore IC-wide responsibilities, and the agency as it is today, given its present set of responsibilities. The IC still has internal politics,[7] although an increasing number of interagency “centers”, as well as the Intellipedia information sharing mechanism, are hoped to improve cooperation between each member.

The current CIA still has a number of functions in common with other countries’ intelligence agencies; see relationships with foreign intelligence agencies. The CIA’s headquarters is in Langley in Fairfax County, Virginia, a few miles west of Washington, D.C. along the Potomac River.

Sometimes, the CIA is referred to euphemistically in government and military parlance as Other Government Agencies (OGA), particularly when its operations in a particular area are an open secret.[8][9] Other terms include The Company[10][11][12][13] and The Agency. ..”

History of Soviet and Russian espionage in the United States

“…Since the late 1920s, the Soviet Union, through its OGPU and NKVD intelligence services, used Russians and foreign-born nationals as well as Communist and left-leaning Americans to perform espionage activities in the United States.[1][2][3] These various espionage networks eventually succeeded in penetrating various U.S. government agencies, transmitting classified or confidential information to Moscow, while influencing U.S. government officials to support policies favorable to the Soviet Union.[1][2][3] The Soviet Union’s greatest espionage achievement was in obtaining plans and specifications for the U.S. atomic bomb.[citation needed]

…”

“… By the end of 1936 at least four mid-level State Department officials were delivering information to Soviet intelligence: Alger Hiss, assistant to Assistant Secretary of State Francis Sayre; Julian Wadleigh, economist in the Trade Agreements Section; Laurence Duggan, Latin American division; and Noel Field, West European division. Whittaker Chambers later testified that the plans for a tank design with a revolutionary new suspension invented by J. Walter Christie (then being tested in the U.S.A.) were procured and put into production in the Soviet Union as the Mark BT, later developed into the famous Soviet T-34 tank.[9][10]

In 1993, experts from the Library of Congress traveled to Moscow to copy previously secret archives of Communist Party USA (CPUSA) records, sent to the Soviet Union for safekeeping by party organizers. The records provide an irrefutable record of Soviet intelligence and cooperation provided by those in the radical left in the United States from the 1920s through the 1940s. Some documents revealed that the CPUSA was actively involved in secretly recruiting party members from African-American groups and rural farm workers. The records contained further evidence that Soviet sympathizers had indeed infiltrated the State Department, beginning in the 1930s. Included were letters from two U.S. ambassadors in Europe to President Franklin D. Roosevelt and a senior State Department official. Thanks to an official in the State department sympathetic to the Party, the confidential correspondence, concerning political and economic matters in Europe, ended up in the hands of Soviet intelligence.[11]

In the late 1930s and 1940 the OGPU, known as the Political Directorate, used the U.S. as one of several staging areas for multiple OGPU plots to murder exiled Soviet leader Leon Trotsky, then living in Mexico City. It was American Communists who infiltrated Trotsky’s killer, Ramón Mercader, into his own household . They were also central to the NKVD’s unsuccessful efforts to free the killer from a Mexican prison.[citation needed]

…”

“…The United States Treasury Department was successfully penetrated by nearly a dozen Soviet agents or information sources, including Harold Glasser and his superior, Harry Dexter White, assistant secretary of the treasury and the second most influential official in the department.[1][2] In Late May 1941 Vitaly Pavlov, a 25 year-old NKVD officer, approached White and attempted to secure his assistance to influence U.S. policy towards Japan. White agreed to assist Soviet intelligence in any way he could. The principal function of White was to aid in the infiltration and placement of Soviet operatives within the government, and protecting sources.[citation needed] When security concerns arose around Nathan Gregory Silvermaster, White protected him in his sensitive position at the Board of Economic Warfare. White likewise was a purveyor of information and resources to assist Soviet aims, and agreed to press for release of German occupation currency plates to the Soviet Union. The Soviets later used the plates to print unrestricted sums of money to exchange for U.S. and Allied hard goods.[14]

In August 1945 Elizabeth Bentley, fearful of assassination by the Soviet KGB, turned herself in to the government.[citation needed] She implicated many agents and sources in the Golos and Silvermaster spy networks, and was the first to accuse Harry Dexter White of acting on behalf of Soviet interests in releasing occupation plates to Moscow, later confirmed by Soviet archives and former KGB officers.[5][14]

Cults: The Wave – Part 1

Cults: The Wave – Part 2

New German Version–Die Welle

die welle teil 1 von 10

die welle teil 2 von 10

die welle teil 3 von 10

die welle teil 4 von 10

die welle teil 5 von 10

die welle teil 6 von 10

die welle teil 7 von 10

die welle teil 8 von 10

die welle teil 9 von 10

die welle teil 10 von 10

Background Articles and Videos

The Third Wave

“…The Third Wave was an experiment to demonstrate the appeal of fascism[1][2] undertaken by history teacher Ron Jones with sophomore high school students attending his Contemporary History class[1] as part of a study of Nazi Germany.[3] The experiment took place at Cubberley High School in Palo Alto, California, during the first week of April 1967.[1] Jones, unable to explain to his students how the German populace could claim ignorance of the extermination of the Jewish people, decided to show them instead.[3] Jones started a movement called “The Third Wave” and convinced his students that the movement is to eliminate democracy.[1] The fact that democracy emphasizes individuality was considered as a drawback of democracy, and Jones emphasized this main point of the movement in its motto: “Strength through discipline, strength through community, strength through action, strength through pride”.[1]

The experiment was not well documented. Of contemporary sources, the experiment is only mentioned in Cubberley High School student newspaper The Cubberley Catamount. It is only briefly mentioned in two issues[4][5], and one more issue of the paper has articles about this experiment, but without much detail.[1] The most detailed account of the experiment is an essay written by Jones himself some six years afterwards.[3] Several other articles about the experiment exist, but all of them were written after a considerable amount of time had passed.[2]

The 1981 TV special The Wave, the 1988 book The Wave, The Wave – The Musical (2000), and the 2008 German film Die Welle were based on the experiment. …”

The Wave

“…The Wave, is a short made-for-TV movie based on Ron Jones‘ The Third Wave experiment. Though more prominently featured as an episode of the ABC Afterschool Special series, this show debuted October 4, 1981; almost two years before being featured in the Afterschool Special series. …”

“…The Wave won a 1982 Emmy for Outstanding Children’s Program, and a 1981 Peabody Award. It also won a 1982 Young Artist Award for Best Television Special – Family Enjoyment.

Writer Johnny Dawkins was nominated for a 1982 Humanitas Prize in the 60 minute category, and a 1983 WGA Award for Best Children’s Show. …”

“…The Wave (original: Die Welle) is a German film based on the book The Wave which was inspired by the social experiment The Third Wave. The remake was quite successful in German cinemas, and after 10 weeks 2.3 million people had watched the film. The film was directed by Dennis Gansel and starred Jürgen Vogel, Max Riemelt, Jennifer Ulrich, Jacob Matschenz and Frederick Lau. …”

The Wave (2009) Movie Trailer

“…The Wave (film)

The Wave is an compelling German film that premiered at Sundance earlier this year. It’s about a high school teacher who sets up an experiment to demonstrate to his students what life is like under a dictatorship, but it soon spins horribly out of control when he forms a social unit with a life of its own. This trailer looks incredible – I’m a bit sad that I missed this at Sundance. It received lukewarm reviews and I never found the time to catch a screening, although it was one I wanted to see. But now that this trailer is out I’m anxious to try and catch it. This is your typical international trailer without any dialogue so as to hide the German language, but it still looks fantastic. Be sure to let us know what you think!

Reviews from Sundance praise the film for its “intoxicating power of conformity.” James Greenberg from the Hollywood Reporter writes that “the film opens with a rush of energy and doesn’t let up.” Thoughts?

The Wave (aka Die Welle) is both co-written and directed by German filmmaker Dennis Gansel, of Girls on Top and Before the Fall previously. The film was co-written by Gansel and Peter Thorwarth and is based on a novel of the same name written by Todd Strasser. This first premiered at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year but never actually picked up a US distributor. If it does find a distributor, we can expect to see this in theaters sometime in early 2009. …”

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

~Senator Obama, in a speech on July 2, 2008

Obama Civilian Security

“Compulsory military service thus leads to compulsory labor service of all citizens who are able to work, male and female. . . . Mobilization has become total; the nation and the state have been transformed into an army; war socialism has replaced the market economy.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Interventionism, page 88

“That democratic socialism, the great utopia of the last few generations, is not only unachievable, but that to strive for it produces something so utterly different that few of those who wish it would be prepared to accept the consequences, many will not believe until the connection has been laid bare in all its aspects.”

~Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, page 23

Both Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are right on target!

Looks like the Obama logo and cult idea came from the television movie The Wave.

Any bets that Bill Ayers, David Axelrod, and Barack Obama all saw the movie?

The Obama Civilian National Security Force is creepy and does look similiar to Hitler’s SA or brownshirts and Hitler youth.

Glenn Beck – The History of ACORN & AmeriCorps

Glenn Beck, Cloward-Piven Strategy, New Republic Series #1

The Obama Youth Corps Wave p1

The Obama Youth Corps Wave p2

No One Took Barack Obama At His Word

Different Presidents, A Different Corps

“The progressives who today masquerade as liberals may rant against fascism; yet it is their policy that paves the way for Hitlerism.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Interventionism, page 88

“Socialism is simply a re-assertion of that tribal ethics whose gradual weakening had made an approach to the Great Society possible.”

~Friedrich A. Hayek, The Mirage of Social Justice, pages 133-4

Background Articles and Videos

Obama’s Civilian National Security Force

By Lee Cary

“…Senator Obama was nearly 17 minutes into his July 2 speech (yet another one where naming Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was required) in Colorado Springs, Colorado when he deviated from his pre-released script and performed without the teleprompter net saying,

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” (emphasis added)

The immediate context for that amazing statement was a preview of parts of his plan to vastly expand community service opportunities for Americans of nearly all ages. He said,

“People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve.”

The range of his community service initiatives was outlined in an earlier American Thinkerarticle. In his campaign document entitled “The Blueprint for Change: Barack Obama’s Plan For America,” Obama’s “Service” section runs a close second to “Education” in complexity. But, with his Colorado Springs’ statement, it grabbed first place in its projected costs to taxpayers. Obama did the cost projection himself.

So it made sense in Colorado Springs when he said his call to community service “will be a central cause of my presidency.” He couldn’t be clearer in signaling his intentions, including a Social Investment Fund Network to link local non-profits with the federal government. …”

Barack Obama: The Community Organizer in Chief

ByLee Cary

“…Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS)

This refers to a large entrée section, historically known by some of its most favorite dishes like AmeriCorps,VISTA and the Senior Corps. Since 1994, total budget appropriations (in 2007 dollars) add up to $12.6 billion, averaging $900 million per year. The CNCS annual budget has been declining since 2004. But Obama plans to triple the scope of the CNCS’s most popular dish — AmeriCorps — from 75,000 “slots” (participants involved) to 250,000. Factor in a proportionate increase ($750 million) added to AmeriCorps funding allocated within the CNCS 2008 budget of $856 million, and the new CNCS budget in an Obama administration could double to about $1.6 billion. But wait, there’s more to add to that budget.

There are five new entrées planned for the CNCS: Classroom Corps where people can volunteer to help in “high-need and underserved schools;” Health Corps, where volunteers are “trained to assist health professionals;” Clean Energy Corps, where volunteers can “promote energy independence through efforts like weatherization, renewable energy projects and educational outreach;” Veterans Corps, where veterans are recruited to serve veterans in VA facilities, nursing homes, and homeless shelters; and the Homeland Security Corps“to help communities plan, prepare for and respond to emergencies.” How much do they cost? …”

The Third Wave

“…The Third Wave was an experiment to demonstrate the appeal of fascism[1][2] undertaken by history teacher Ron Jones with sophomore high school students attending his Contemporary History class[1] as part of a study of Nazi Germany.[3] The experiment took place at Cubberley High School in Palo Alto, California, during the first week of April 1967.[1] Jones, unable to explain to his students how the German populace could claim ignorance of the extermination of the Jewish people, decided to show them instead.[3] Jones started a movement called “The Third Wave” and convinced his students that the movement is to eliminate democracy.[1] The fact that democracy emphasizes individuality was considered as a drawback of democracy, and Jones emphasized this main point of the movement in its motto: “Strength through discipline, strength through community, strength through action, strength through pride”.[1]

The experiment was not well documented. Of contemporary sources, the experiment is only mentioned in Cubberley High School student newspaper The Cubberley Catamount. It is only briefly mentioned in two issues[4][5], and one more issue of the paper has articles about this experiment, but without much detail.[1] The most detailed account of the experiment is an essay written by Jones himself some six years afterwards.[3] Several other articles about the experiment exist, but all of them were written after a considerable amount of time had passed.[2]

The 1981 TV special The Wave, the 1988 book The Wave, The Wave – The Musical (2000), and the 2008 German film Die Welle were based on the experiment. …”

The Wave

“…The Wave, is a short made-for-TV movie based on Ron Jones‘ The Third Wave experiment. Though more prominently featured as an episode of the ABC Afterschool Special series, this show debuted October 4, 1981; almost two years before being featured in the Afterschool Special series. …”

“…The Wave won a 1982 Emmy for Outstanding Children’s Program, and a 1981 Peabody Award. It also won a 1982 Young Artist Award for Best Television Special – Family Enjoyment.

Writer Johnny Dawkins was nominated for a 1982 Humanitas Prize in the 60 minute category, and a 1983 WGA Award for Best Children’s Show. …”

Anyone tempted to ignore the 2010 Census will have a tough time doing it — especially if they have kids in school.

The government has launched Census in Schools, an all-out campaign targeting superintendents, principals, teachers, students and, indirectly, parents, as schools open across the nation this month and next. The message: The Census is coming and here’s why everyone should care.

The goal is to send posters, teaching guides, maps and lesson plans to every school in the nation, Puerto Rico and U.S. island territories to encourage everyone to participate in the national count. The materials will land in more than 118,000 schools and reach 56 million students.

“It’s great to reach the children because children are such strong voices in their homes,” says Renee Jefferson-Copeland, chief of the Census schools program. “In households that are linguistically isolated, they can express the information to their parents.”

…Between January and March, the Census Bureau will help plan a week of Census education in schools. During Census Week, teachers will devote 15 minutes every day for five days to the topic by discussing such things as civic participation, confidentiality or geography.

And now: Cash for Convicts!

By Michelle Malkin

The feckless feds are begging prisoners to give the money back. Really:

Federal economic stimulus cash was handed out to cons behind bars in Bay State prisons after a bureaucratic snafu resulted in $250 checks being sent to some inmates – and now red-faced feds want it back.

“Taxpayers already believe the inmates are running the asylum in Washington,” U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) said in a statement. “Now it appears they are being compensated for their efforts.”

Not only did the feds send the cash to incarcerated cons, but they failed to respond to state officials who sounded the alarm about the inmate windfall – now the subject of a national probe.

The state Department of Correction initially withheld stimulus checks mailed to 23 inmates because prison officials believed the convicts were not entitled to the cash, said DOC spokeswoman Diane Wiffin.

The DOC said it released the funds after the federal government ignored several requests for guidance.

“In the absence of a formal directive, DOC determined that it did not have grounds to continue to withhold the checks from the recipients,” Wiffin said in an e-mail.

The Herald learned yesterday the U.S. Social Security Administration is asking at least 14 of the Bay State prisoners to return the cash. Inmates are generally not allowed to receive Social Security benefits while incarcerated.

It’s not clear if the cons have already spent the money in the commissary or elsewhere, however. …”

Obama’s “Civilian National Security force” part 1 “The Creation”

G. Edward Griffin- On Individualism v Collectivism Part 1 of 4

G. Edward Griffin- On Individualism v Collectivism Part 2 of 4

G. Edward Griffin- On Individualism v Collectivism Part 3 of 4

G. Edward Griffin- On Individualism v Collectivism Part 4 of 4

“It is a double-edged makeshift to entrust an individual or a group of individuals with the authority to resort to violence. The enticement implied is too tempting for a human being. The men who are to protect the community against violent aggression easily turn into the most dangerous aggressors. They transgress their mandate. They misuse their power for the oppression of those whom they were expected to defend against oppression. The main political problem is how to prevent the police power from becoming tyrannical. This is the meaning of all the struggles for liberty. The essential characteristic of Western civilization that distinguishes it from the arrested and petrified civilizations of the East was and is its concern for freedom from the state. The history of the West, from the age of the Greek πόλις [city-state] down to the present-day resistance to socialism, is essentially the history of the fight for liberty against the encroachments of the officeholders.”

Live From The Ministry Of Truth

U.S. Constitution: First Amendment

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

O’Reilly & Beck Targeted by Radical Far Left Groups

Rush Limbaugh on Hannity (3 of 4): Obama – More Control Over Our Lives

An Open Letter To President Obama – Wall Street Journal (The Fairness Doctrine) / Rush Limbaugh

The Doctrine Part 1 of 2

The Doctrine Part 2 of 2

Fairness Doctrine Comes To The Internet

Cass Sunstein, Obama’s handpicked Regulation Czar

First they ignore you.

Second they ridicule you.

Third they lie about you.

Fourth they try to silence you.

Who are they?

They is the far left consisting of Marxists, Communists, Progressives, Radicals, and Socialists of the far left Democratic Party.

This pattern is followed daily by the far left in attacks on both internet bloggers and talk radio show hosts.

The two new very sharp point men for Obama’s attempt to silence his critics are Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Czar /Commissar and Cass Sunstein, Regulatory Czar/Commissar.

Trying to silence talk radio is a dangerous game for anyone for the simple reason they forget that millions are listening.

The American people are revoluting against the far left progressive radical socialist Democratic Party lead by President Obama.

Glenn Beck’s request that you download the videos from YouTube and store them on your computer should be taken.

I have noticed recently that a number of videos that are in any way critical of Obama and the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party are no longer available on YouTube.

Google executives are Obama supporters and are apparently cooperating with the censors in the White House.

Reminds me of rewriting history in the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell’s book 1984 and the movie 1984-Videos as well as Stalin’s Soviet Union and Mao’s Communist China.

Totalitarianism With A Smiley Face

“In America the majority raises formidable barriers around the liberty of opinion; within these barriers an author may write what he pleases, but woe to him if he goes beyond them. ”

~Alexis de Tocqueville

“There is simply no other choice than this: either to abstain from interference in the free play of the market, or to delegate the entire management of production and distribution to the government. Either capitalism or socialism: there exists no middle way.”

~Ludwig von Mises

“The argument for Liberty is not an argument against organization, which is one of the most powerful tools human reasoning can employ, but an argument against all exclusive, privilege, monopolistic organization, against the use of coercion to prevent others from doing better.”

~Friedrich A. Hayek

Background Articles and Videos

FCC’s Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd’s Effort To Silence Free Speech

“…It appears as though Mark Lloyd, Obama’s new Diversity Czar, has been given his marching orders. He is charged with a back door effort to bring back the fairness doctrine.

Lloyd is a Senior Fellow from the far left Center for American Progress, which is an organization that already has their finger prints on much of Obama’s agenda.

Lloyd wrote in his book, Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America..

“The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) must be reformed along democratic lines and funded on a substantial level,”

“Federal and regional broadcast operations and local stations should be funded at levels commensurate with or above those spending levels at which commercial operations are funded,” Lloyd wrote. “This funding should come from license fees charged to commercial broadcasters. Funding should not come from congressional appropriations. Sponsorship should be prohibited at all public broadcasters.”

Along with this money, Lloyd would regulate much of the programming on these stations to make sure they focused on “diverse views” and government activities. link

It’s plainly clear that Lloyd wants government control over all radio content, thus silencing free speech, specifically ideas with a conservative or libertarian viewpoint. Believe me, if radio was dominated by a progressive point of view from the extreme left, there would be no push to regulate free expression on the airwaves. This is just an attempt to back door the fairness doctrine and shut down dissenting views.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has announced a new “Chief Diversity Officer,” communications attorney Mark Lloyd.

But Doctor of Jurisprudence Lloyd is far more than merely a communications attorney. He was at one time a Senior Fellow at the uber-liberal Center for American Progress (CAP), for whom he co-wrote a June 2007 report entitled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio.”

Which rails against the fact that the American people overwhelmingly prefer to listen to conservative (and Christian) talk radio rather than the liberal alternative, and suggests ways the federal government can remedy this free-market created “problem.”

* Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.
* Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
* Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.

These last two get perilously close to the use of “localism” to silence conservative (and Christian) radio stations, about which we have been warning for quite some time. …”

Mark Lloyd, Obama/Soros hitman at the FCC [Darleen Click]

“…Gotta love that new title Mr. Lloyd has acquired

Associate General Counsel and Chief Diversity Officer

A Senior Fellow at the George Soros’ Center for American Progress, Mark Lloyd’s antipathy towards non-leftist participation in the public square is well known. He has written two anti-free speech hit pieces on “conservative talk radio” … a CAP “analysis” “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” which never examines talk radio in the larger sphere as being the only alternative to Leftist dominated broadcast television (news and entertainment), newspapers, university and college campuses … and “Forget the Fairness Doctrine”, a whiney little piece where Lloyd tries to bare his teeth against people who oppose his conclusions in the first piece and defends his Trojan Horse plan to achieve his own STFU policy towards conservative talk radio with so-called “local diversity” objectives.

Washington, D.C. — Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski recently appointed Mark Lloyd, a former senior fellow at the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP), to be the FCC’s “Chief Diversity Officer.” Lloyd is a proponent of the Fairness Doctrine and recently wrote that the Doctrine, and other regulatory tools such as localism and diversity mandates, should be employed by the FCC to limit the number of conservative voices on the air and supplant them with liberal voices. He also suggests fining conservative radio stations up to $250 million and giving the proceeds to national public radio. According to polling conducted by Zogby International and The O’Leary Report, most American voters disagree with
what Lloyd prescribes. …”

“Regulatory Czar” Wants Bloggers to Just Shut Up

“…Sunstein’s First Amendment

It is Sunstein’s “Global Chilling” position on the First Amendment about which Kyle Smith writes:

Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a “chilling effect” on speech that might hurt someone’s feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws need to be written to corral them. Advance copies of Sunstein’s new book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done, have gone out to reviewers ahead of its September publication date, but considering the prominence with which Sunstein is about to be endowed, his worrying views are fair game now. Sunstein is President Obama’s choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. It’s the bland titles that should scare you the most.“Although obscure,” reported the Wall Street Journal, “the post wields outsize power. It oversees regulations throughout the government, from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Obama aides have said the job will be crucial as the new administration overhauls financial-services regulations, attempts to pass universal health care and tries to forge a new approach to controlling emissions of greenhouse gases.”

Smith assumes Sunstein got his gig due his earlier book, Nudge, “which suggests that government ought to gently force people to be better human beings.”

Although that could be the reason, the fact that Sunstein is a long-time Obama fan — and married to Samantha Power, another Obama cheerleader — most likely weighed heavily in POTUS’s choice.

Bloggers beware. Smith informs:

Sunstein also believes that – whether you’re a blogger, The New York Times or a Web hosting service – you should be held responsible even for what your commenters say. […]“As we have seen,” Sunstein writes, having shown us no such thing, “falsehoods can undermine democracy itself.” What Sunstein means by that sentence is pretty clear: He doesn’t like so-called false rumors about his longtime University of Chicago friend and colleague, Barack Obama.

RBO agrees with Smith, this sounds like a lot of stuff and nonsense: …”

A Czar Too Far

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

“…Meet your future Regulatory Czar – Mr. Cass Sunstein. He is a so-called American legal scholar, particularly in the fields of constitutional law, administrative law, environmental law and behavioral economics. For 27 years, Sunstein taught at the University of Chicago Law School where he continues to teach as the Harry Kalven Visiting Professor. Sunstein is currently the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. Sunstein will head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration if confirmed – in other words, he will be the new Regulatory Czar.

By a nudge we mean anything that influences our choices. A school cafeteria might try to nudge kids toward good diets by putting the healthiest foods at front. We think that it’s time for institutions, including government, to become much more user-friendly by enlisting the science of choice to make life easier for people and by gentling nudging them in directions that will make their lives better. …”

Fairness Doctrine

ByCharles J. Sykes

“…The term “fairness” is, of course, a misnomer here: the doctrine demands heavy-handed, content-based speech regulation by the Federal Communications Commission. At best, the Fairness Doctrine would be Affirmative Action for Air America. At worst, it would be a cudgel to bludgeon troublesome political opponents and stultify political debate.

But despite the current enthusiasm for its restoration on the left, the Fairness Doctrine is both legally and technologically obsolete, based on principles that have already been rejected by the courts, and justifications that have been swept away by the transformation in the media over the last two decades.

At the time the doctrine was first promulgated, there were only three networks and a mere handful of broadcast outlets. Today there are hundreds: satellite radio, cable television, and the interne. The case for government control has never been weaker.

Supporters of the Fairness Doctrine argued then, and now, that broadcast speech is uniquely subject to government regulation because it is carried over what liberals like to call the “publicly owned airwaves.” According to this argument, the scarcity of spots on radio and television spectrum justified government regulation and exempted broadcast speech from the First Amendment protections enjoyed by newspapers and other media (including, for the time being, the internet and cable.)

But the argument that the airwaves are “public” is remarkably weak. Far from granting the government greater powers for regulation, the fact that airwaves are public ought to give such speech even greater protection. Private individuals or entities can limit speech, but government cannot; speech in a private mall or office can be regulated; but speech in the public square enjoys special protections, precisely because it is public, where the powers of the censor are the most tightly constrained.

Moreover, the argument that broadcast speech can be regulated because it is carried on “public airwaves,” could also be applied to newspapers that are, after all, delivered using publicly-owned roads; cable stations are transmitted over government-sanctioned cable lines; satellites transmit through the (publicly owned?) atmosphere; and magazines and other materials are sent through the U.S. Mail. Are they also subject to government regulation because of their mode of dissemination?

This is not merely speculation. In the mid-1980s, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit specifically rejected the argument that the government’s granting of usable frequencies to broadcasters was a justification for granting broadcast speech a lesser standard of free speech protections.

“A publisher can deliver his newspapers only because the government provides streets and regulates traffic on the streets by allocating rights of way,” the judges wrote. “Yet no one would contend that the necessity for these governmental functions, which are certainly analogous to the government’s function in allocating broadcast frequencies, could justify regulation of the content of the newspaper to ensure that it serves the needs of the citizens.”[1] …”

Rush and Beck on the Fairness Doctrine threat

By Michelle Malkin

“…In case you missed it yesterday, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck spotlighted Team Obama’s direct and indirect threats to free speech — and how the Fairness Doctrine (or some stealthier form of it) might be reinstituted.

Remembering 9/11 seven years later

What is 2996?

On September 11, 2006, more than 3,000 bloggers joined together to remember the victims of 9/11.

Each year we will honor them by remembering their lives, and not by remembering their murderers.

If you would like to help out, by pledging to post a tribute on your own blog on 9/11 of this year, click the button at the top of the sidebar. Then, use the web to learn something about the life of the name you are given, and on 9/11, post your tribute your blog or website.

But, and this is critical, the tributes should celebrate the lives of these people–kind of like a wake. Over the last 5 years we’ve heard the names of the killers, and all about the victim’s deaths. This is a chance to learn about and celebrate those who died. Forget the murderers, they don’t deserve to be remembered. But some people who died that day deserve to be remembered––2,996 people.

“Capitalism means free enterprise, sovereignty of the consumers in economic matters, and sovereignty of the voters in political matters. Socialism means full government control of every sphere of the individuals life and the unrestricted supremacy of the government in its capacity as central board of production management.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Bureaucracy, page 10.

GUIDE TO THE GEORGE SOROS NETWORK

“…George Soros is one of the most powerful men on earth. A New York hedge fund manager, he has amassed a personal fortune estimated at about $7.2 billion. His management company controls billions more in investor assets. Since 1979, his foundation network — whose flagship is the Open Society Institute (OSI) — has dispensed an estimated $5 billion to a multitude of organizations whose objectives are consistent with those of Soros. (The President of OSI and the Soros Foundation Network is Aryeh Neier, former Director of the socialist League for Industrial Democracy.) With assets of $859 million as of 2005, OSI alone donates scores of millions of dollars annually to these various groups, whose major agendas can be summarized as follows:

promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation

promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States

opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act

depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral

promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws

promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes

promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens

defending suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters

financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left

advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending

opposing the death penalty in all circumstances

promoting socialized medicine in the United States

promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is “not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization”

bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations

promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike …”

Beck…The New Republic – America’s Future (day 2, part 5)

Beck…The New Republic – America’s Future (day 2, part 6)

Beck…The New Republic – America’s Future (day 2, part 7)

The Real Story of the Weathermen

“Socialism… is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build; it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means of production has created.”

MSU SDS Reunion: Bernardine Dohrn speaks (2)

Communists on Campus: The Weather Underground

The Real Story of the Weathermen – ties to the Cuban DGI

Larry Grathwohl on Ayers’ plan for American re-education camps and the need to kill millions

America’s Survival – Weather Underground

The Company You Keep -Trailer (Robert Redford, Shia LaBeouf and Julie Christie)

Bill Ayers

“…William Charles Ayers (born December 26, 1944)[1] is an American elementary education theorist and former leader in the anti-war movement that opposed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. He is known for the radical nature of his activism, which began within the anti-war movement of the 1960s, as well as his current work in education reform, curriculum, and instruction. In 1969 he co-founded the violent radical left organization the Weather Underground, which conducted a campaign of bombing public buildings during the 1960s and 1970s. He is now a professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar.[2] During the 2008 Presidential campaign, a controversy arose over his past contacts with candidate Barack Obama. …”

Bill Ayers

Participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972

Currently a professor of education at the University of Illinois

Born in 1944, Bill Ayers, along with his wife Bernardine Dohrn, was a 1960s leader of the homegrown terrorist group Weatherman, a Communist-driven splinter faction of Students for a Democratic Society. Characterizing Weatherman as “an American Red Army,” Ayers summed up the organization’s ideology as follows: “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents.”

Today Ayers is a professor of education and a Senior University Scholar at the University of Illinois, where, as of October 2008, his office door was adorned with photographs of Mumia Abu-Jamal, Che Guevara and Malcolm X. He also has authored a series of books about parenting and educating children, including: A Kind and Just Parent; To Become a Teacher; City Kids; City Teachers; To Teach; The Good Preschool Teacher; Zero Tolerance: Resisting the Drive for Punishment in Our Schools; and Teaching Towards Freedom: Moral Commitment and Ethical Action in the Classroom.

Ayers was an active participant in Weatherman’s 1969 “Days of Rage” riots in Chicago, where nearly 300 members of the organization employed guerrilla-style tactics to viciously attack police officers and civilians alike, and to destroy massive amounts of property via vandalism and arson; their objective was to further spread their anti-war, anti-American message. Reminiscing on those riots, Ayers says pridefully: “We’d … proven that it was possible — we didn’t all die, we were still there.”

In his 2001 book Fugitive Days, Ayers recounts his life as a Sixties radical and boasts that he “participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.” Of the day he bombed the Pentagon, Ayers writes, “Everything was absolutely ideal…. The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.” He adds:

“There’s something about a good bomb … Night after night, day after day, each majestic scene I witnessed was so terrible and so unexpected that no city would ever again stand innocently fixed in my mind. Big buildings and wide streets, cement and steel were no longer permanent. They, too, were fragile and destructible. A torch, a bomb, a strong enough wind, and they, too, would come undone or get knocked down.”

In a 2001 interview, Ayers expressed his enduring hatred for the United States. “What a country,” he said. “It makes me want to puke.” …”

“…Bernardine Rae Dohrn (née Ohrnstein, born January 12, 1942) is an American former leader of the Anti-Vietnam War radical organization Weather Underground. She is an Associate Professor of Law at Northwestern University School of Law and the Director of Northwestern’s Children and Family Justice Center. …”

Bernardine Dohrn

Participated in the bombings of New York City police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972

Delighted in Charles Manson’s infamous murders

Director of the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University

Professor at Northwestern University Law School

Born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in 1942, Bernardine Dohrn is currently an Associate Professor of Law at Northwestern University, where she is also Director of the Legal Clinic’s Children and Family Justice Center. Moreover, she sits on important committees and boards of the American Bar Association and the American Civil Liberties Union.

In the 1960s, Dohrn was a leader of the Students for a Democratic Society’s “Weatherman” faction, which in 1969 went underground to become America’s first terrorist cult. At a 1969 “War Council” in Flint, Michigan, Dohrn gave her most memorable and notorious speech to her followers. Holding her fingers in what became the Weatherman “fork salute,” she said of the bloody murders recently committed by the Manson Family in which the pregnant actress Sharon Tate and a Folgers Coffee heiress and several other inhabitants of a Benedict Canyon mansion were brutally stabbed to death: “Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!” The “War Council” ended with a formal declaration of war against “AmeriKKKa,” always spelled with three K’s to signify the United States’ allegedly ineradicable white racism.

Professor Dohrn has said of her Weatherman past, “We rejected terrorism. We were careful not to hurt anybody.” Both assertions are false, however. Weatherman’s twofold agenda was terrorism (which is why Charles Manson was Dohrn’s hero) and war (the organization’s very existence was launched with a formal “declaration of war”), and Dohrn periodically issued “war communiqués” to the public at large. The intention of the group was to shed their “white skin privilege” and launch a violent race war on behalf of Third World People. A Chicago district attorney named Richard Elrod was seriously injured in the Weatherman riot that erupted during the Chicago “Days of Rage” in October 1969, and he was paralyzed for life as a result. Dohrn later led a celebration of Elrod’s paralysis by leading her comrades in a parody of a Bob Dylan song — “Lay, Elrod, Lay.” Moreover, law-enforcement authorities are still investigating a bombing in San Francisco that killed a policeman, for which Professor Dohrn is one of the suspects.

In 1974 Dohrn co-authored — along with Bill Ayers (her future husband), Jeff Jones, and Celia Sojourn — a book titled Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism. This book contained the following statements:

“We are a guerrilla organization. We are communist women and men … deeply affected by the historic events of our time in the struggle against U.S. imperialism.”

“Our intention is to disrupt the empire, to incapacitate it, to put pressure on the cracks, to make it hard to carry out its bloody functioning against the people of the world, to join the world struggle, to attack from the inside.”

“The only path to the final defeat of imperialism and the building of socialism is revolutionary war.”

“Revolutionary war will be complicated and protracted. It includes mass struggle and clandestine struggle, peaceful and violent, political and economic, cultural and military, where all forms are developed in harmony with the armed struggle.”

“Without mass struggle there can be no revolution.
Without armed struggle there can be no victory.”

“We need a revolutionary communist party in order to lead the struggle, give coherence and direction to the fight, seize power and build the new society.”

“Our job is to tap the discontent seething in many sectors of the population, to find allies everywhere people are hungry or angry, to mobilize poor and working people against imperialism.”

“Socialism is the total opposite of capitalism/imperialism. It is the rejection of empire and white supremacy. Socialism is the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the eradication of the social system based on profit.” …”

Jeff Jones

“…Jeff Jones (born 23 February 1947) is an environmental activist and consultant in Upstate New York. He was a national officer in Students for a Democratic Society, a founding member of Weatherman, and a leader of the Weather Underground.

“…In 1964, with the Vietnam War rising in his consciousness, Jones went to hear a speech by Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., U.S. ambassador to South Vietnam. Cabot’s oratory centered on the need to stop the spread of communism, and how, in doing so, the peasants of Vietnam would be saved from this menace. Lacking strong ideological beliefs, Jones placed a good chunk of his trust in what the politicians were saying. Along with his father, Jones petitioned on behalf of the peace candidate for President, Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson’s post-election escalation of the war cemented the young man’s belief that politicians were not to be trusted, ever. [2]

In the fall of 1965, Jones arrived at Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio. Previous to his arrival, students at the college had been active in the civil rights movement, and in no time, Jones participated in an antiwar protest in Cincinnati. [2] When he returned to campus after the protest, he joined SDS (Oct.1965). [1] He spoke at numerous colleges about Vietnam and traveled to SDS conventions where he came into contact with the stars of the organization, such as Al Haber and Todd Gitlin. [1] In April 1967, a year and a half into his stay at Antioch College, Jones quit school to become the regional director of the New York City SDS, and thus, a full time activist. [2]

Shortly thereafter, Jones wrote to the Selective Service to renounce his pacifism and to have his status as a conscientious objector erased. The intensification of the war and the notion that it was immoral, led Jones to conclude that fighting back was an acceptable tactic. He just would not be fighting for the United States military, preferring jail to being compelled to serve. [1] He participated in nearly every big protest in the years 1967-1969 including:

Oct. 1967 antiwar protest at the Pentagon that had upwards of 100,000 people. [1]
The Apr. 1968 Columbia University protests of 1968 (note picture of future Weatherman Mark Rudd on cover of magazine w/plaid shirt). [1]
The Aug. 1968 Democratic National Convention where riots raged in the streets and the brutality of the Chicago police was televised nationwide to a shocked and appalled American public. [1]
In the documentary The Weather Underground, Jeff Jones is featured in a clip giving this defiant response to the police brutality, “The power belongs to the young people and the black people in this country. Come on! We gotta build a strong base and someday we gotta knock those motherfuckers who control this thing right on their ass.” [3]

Jones’ activism was not limited to the streets of America. In Nov. 1967, Jones and Cathlyn Platt Wilkerson traveled to Cambodia for what they hoped was an eventual journey to Hanoi. They were on a fact-finding mission that stalled in Phnom Penh because of heavy bombing in North Vietnam. Instead they met there with representatives from the North Vietnamese embassy and members of the National Liberation Front and gathered as much information on the war as they could. [1] Their excursion is part of the Weather Underground FBI file. [4] …”

“…Jeff Jones had felt as early as 1975 that the underground had run its course and that it was time to consider surfacing, but supported those who chose to remain there. He essentially believed that the time for armed acts was over. [5] However, Jones would not surface until late Oct. 1981 when he was unexpectedly caught up in a police sweep of individuals suspected of participating in the deadly robbery of an armored truck. A SWAT team arrested Jones and Eleanor Raskin, and allowed a friend to take custody of their four-year-old son. [1] In Dec. 1981, a week before the couples’ sentencing, they were married legally. At sentencing Jones received probation and community service, while the charges against his wife were dismissed. [1]

In the years after he gained his full freedom, Jones has worked as a reporter and editor covering New York State politics and policy. He was a communications director for ten years at Environmental Advocates of New York. He now heads up his own consulting firm called Jeff Jones Strategies that specializes in media expertise, writing and campaign strategies that help grassroots and progressive groups to achieve their goals. [8] Jones is also working on the board of the financial arm of Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS), a group that works closely with the new SDS. [9] He lives in Albany, New York with his wife and has two sons.[1] Jones finally traveled to Vietnam in 1986. [2] …”

“…Forming the core of the 1960s counter-cultural movement known collectively as the New Left, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was a radical organization that aspired to overthrow America’s democratic institutions, remake its government in a Marxist image, and help America’s enemies defeat her sons on the battlefield in Vietnam. The group developed from the Student League for Industrial Democracy, the youth branch of the socialist League for Industrial Democracy.

Established in late 1959, SDS held its first meeting in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1960. Its first President was Alan Haber, and its first impress on the political landscape was the Port Huron Statement of 1962, drafted principally by Tom Hayden, a former editor of the University of Michigan’s student newspaper. The Port Huron Statement adopted the position of “anti-anti-Communism,” refusing to support the West in the Cold War. The statement denounced bigotry in the United States, world hunger and American abundance, materialism, personal alienation, industrialization, the threat of nuclear war, military spending, and the Cold War. Its prescribed solution to Cold War tensions reads as follows:

“Universal controlled disarmament must replace deterrence and arms control as the [American] national defense goal. … It is necessary that America make disarmament, not nuclear deterrence, ‘credible’ to the Soviets and to the world. That is, disarmament should be continually avowed as a national goal; concrete plans should be presented at conference tables.” …”

Labor Leader Named Head of New York Fed

“…The Federal Reserve chose a labor leader to succeed a former Goldman Sachs executive as the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of New York’s private-sector board of directors.

Denis Hughes, president of the New York state branch of the AFL-CIO, had been serving as acting chairman of the New York Fed board since May, when Stephen Friedman stepped down from the position.

Mr. Friedman, a former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. chairman and adviser to President George W. Bush, had faced questions about his purchases of Goldman stock while serving on the New York Fed’s board.

The Fed decision formalizes Mr. Hughes’s role as chairman through the end of 2009. The Fed board in Washington will announce in November or December who will serve as chairman in 2010. Columbia University President Lee Bollinger was named deputy chairman, a position that Mr. Hughes previously held. Mr. Bollinger has been a New York Fed director since January 2007. …”

Movement for A Democratic Society

“Welcome to Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS)! MDS is an education and social action organization dedicated to increasing democracy in all phases of our common ife. It seeks to promote the active participation of ordinary people in the formation of a movement to build a society free from poverty, ignorance, war, exploitation, racism and sexism.”

Lockerbie convict release ‘travesty of justice’ – 21 Aug 09

Lockerbie terrorist may be freed 08-13-09

People & Power – Lockerbie bombing probe – 01 Jul 07 – Pt 1

People & Power – Lockerbie bombing probe – 01 Jul 07 – Pt 2

Inside Story – Lockerbie – 25 August 09

Background Articles and Videos

Pan Am Flight 103

“… Pan Am Flight 103 was Pan American World Airways’ third daily scheduled transatlantic flight from London’s Heathrow Airport to New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport. On Wednesday 21 December 1988, the aircraft flying this route—a Boeing 747-121 named Clipper Maid of the Seas—was destroyed by a bomb, killing all 243 passengers and 16 crew members.[1] Eleven people in Lockerbie, southern Scotland, were killed as large sections of the plane fell in and around the town, bringing total fatalities to 270. As a result, the event has been named by the media as the Lockerbie Bombing.

In 2001, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, a Libyan, was convicted of involvement in the bombing and sentenced to life imprisonment. On 20 August 2009, the Scottish Government released him on compassionate grounds to return to Libya as he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer and had a life expectancy of less than 3 months. …”

The big divide over the downing of Pan Am 103

“…”In Britain the case for letting al Megrahi go home has been reinforced by doubts about the safety of his conviction.”

“America sees things differently,” writes Philips. “Relatives of the 189 American victims of the bombing argued passionately for him to die in a Scottish prison. Hillary Clinton, the U.S. secretary of state, very publicly told the Scottish authorities it would be “absolutely wrong” to send him home.”

“Many commentators,” says Philips, “smell a rat here. If the U.S. was really determined to keep al-Megrahi in jail, it could have worked behind the scenes in recent months, or even years. There were suspicions that Britain was working towards the release of the convicted agent as early as 2007, when Tony Blair, the prime minister at the time, went to Libya to see Colonel Gaddafi and secured a vast oil exploration deal for BP, which had been driven out of the country after he took power in 1969. The release became a near certainty when the British parliament last year passed a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya that seemed designed for al-Megrahi.”

“Britain and America have good reasons for wanting al-Megrahi to disappear from public discussion,” says Philips. “The Scottish legal authorities, after much delay, allowed an appeal to be heard that would have re-opened the issue of his guilt. One of the issues concerns a key plank in the prosecution case: a Maltese shopkeeper identifying al-Megrahi as the buyer of clothes that were found in the suitcase containing the bomb. But it is now alleged that the court was not told that al-Megrahi’s photograph had appeared in the local press before the shopkeeper identified him.”

“Al-Megrahi’s lawyer, writes Philips, withdrew his appeal after a visit to Greenock prison by Mr MacAskill for a private talk with the convicted man, an event unprecedented in such a sensitive case. This has fanned speculation about a possible deal with the Libyan: if he withdrew the appeal, thus closing the file on further embarrassing revelations, he could go home.”

This was strongly denied Thursday by Mr MacAskill. “Nevertheless, the CIA, the British security and intelligence services and the Scottish legal authorities must all have breathed a sigh of relief when the appeal was withdrawn. In this context, Mrs Clinton’s harsh words on the case can be seen as grandstanding to the U.S. public, when she knew the decision to release him had already been taken,” says Philips. …”

Sick: Gadhafi wants to pitch a tent in New Jersey

By Michelle Malkin

“…How much more suffering does the Obama administration want American relatives of Lockerbie bombing murder victims to take? Fresh off delivering a hero’s welcome for freed Lockerbie jihadist Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, blood-stained Libyan terrorist-enabler Moammar Gadhafi is headed to America next month.

And he wants to pitch a tent in upscale Englewood, NJ after speaking to the UN General Assembly. I wish it were just a sick joke. It’s not:

Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi will set foot on U.S. soil for the first time next month when he comes to address the U.N. General Assembly. Now he wants to put down stakes in the middle of American suburbia.

Plans to set up a tent and allow him to stay at a Libyan-owned estate in this upscale community 12 miles north of Manhattan were attacked Monday by neighborhood residents and public officials, particularly after the hero’s welcome Libya extended last week to the lone man convicted in the 1988 bombing of Pan American Flight 103.

The attack over Lockerbie, Scotland, thought to be the work of Libyan intelligence, killed all 259 people on board the flight, including 33 from New Jersey. Abdel Baset al-Megrahi was freed from a life sentence in a Scottish jail and returned to Libya on compassionate grounds because he is dying of cancer.

“Gadhafi is a dangerous dictator whose hands are covered with the blood of Americans and our allies,” said U.S. Rep. Steve Rothman, whose district includes Englewood. He promised there would be “hell to pay” if the U.S. State Department violates a long-standing deal barring the dictator from staying at the Libyan estate.

State department officials said no decision had been made on the issue.

A smack in the face of Lockerbie victims’ families — and all families who have lost loved ones to jihadi acts of evil: …”

Gwynne Dyer: Al-Megrahi is free because the case was so weak

“…THE KANGAROO COURT

Al-Megrahi’s trial took place in 2001. His colleague was freed, but he was jailed for 27 years (in Scotland, because Pan Am 103 came down in Lockerbie). As time passed, however, the case began to unravel.

The Maltese shopkeeper who had identified al-Megrahi, Tony Gauci, turned out to be living in Australia, supported by several million dollars that the Americans had paid him for his evidence.

The allegation that the timer for the bomb had been supplied to Libya by the Swiss manufacturer Mebo turned out to be false. The owner of Mebo, Edwin Bollier, revealed that he had turned down an offer of $4 million from the FBI in 1991 to testify that he had sold his MST-13 timers to Libya.

One of Bollier’s former employees, Ulrich Lumpert, did testify at al-Megrahi’s trial that MST-13 timers had been supplied to Libya–but in 2007 he admitted that he had lied at the trial.

And this year it was revealed that Pan Am’s baggage area at London’s Heathrow airport was broken into 17 hours before Pan Am 103 took off on its last flight. (The police knew that 12 years ago, but kept it secret at al-Megrahi’s trial.) The theory that the fatal bag was put on a feeder flight from Malta became even less likely.

All of which explains why the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission announced in 2007 that it would refer al-Megrahi’s case to the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh because he “may have suffered a miscarriage of justice”.

THE DEAL

The Review Commission’s decision caused a crisis, because a new court hearing would reveal how shoddy the evidence at the first one was. Happily for London and Washington, al-Megrahi was now dying of cancer, so a deal was possible. He would give up his plea for a retrial, no dirty linen about the original trial would be aired in public, and he would be set free.

A miserable story, but hardly a unique one. A man who was probably innocent of the charges against him, a loyal servant of the Libyan state who was framed by the West and hung out to dry by his own government, has been sent home to die. …”

The United States and Iran: Part IX: Pan Am 103: More Americans Dead and Iranian Military Escalation

“…When Libya agreed to cooperate and coordinate with Iran on terrorist operations, that put Libyan President Muammar Qadhafi right where Iran needed him for the revenge attack against the United States for the Iran 665 shoot-down.

For the victims and their families in Iran, Scotland, and the United States, the whole truth would be secondary to protecting state secrets — even if it was those very secrets that had caused their family members’ deaths.

When the Pan Am 103 commissioners finally brought in their report, in 1990, they were adamant in concluding that the bombing could have been prevented and that there “are gaping holes throughout the system.” They charged that the FAA had failed to keep pace with changing times. “At a time when bombings already had become the preferred method for terrorists, the security program was still aimed largely at preventing hijackings. There were shortcomings in virtually all areas . . .” The 182-page commission report called for a complete remodeling of US airline security. That did not happen.

To this day, the United States has not released files on secret military, DEA and other intelligence operations smuggling drugs and other contraband from the Middle East, through Europe and into the United States. Time magazine reported in 1992 that a team of agents operating in Lebanon to help secure release of American hostages were on board Pan Am 103 returning to the United States. Time wrote:

Almost immediately after the Pan Am bombing, which killed the 259 people aboard the plane and 11 more on the ground, the prime suspect was Ahmed Jibril, the roly-poly boss of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (P.F.L.P.-G.C.). Two months earlier, West German police had arrested 16 members of his terrorist organization. Seized during the raids was a plastic bomb concealed in a Toshiba cassette player, similar to the one that blew up Flight 103. There was other evidence pointing to Jibril. His patron was Syria. His banker for the attack on the Pan Am plane appeared to be Iran. U.S. intelligence agents even traced a wire transfer of several million dollars to a bank account in Vienna belonging to the P.F.L.P.-G.C. Iran’s motive seemed obvious enough. The previous July, the U.S.S. Vincennes had mistakenly shot down an Iranian Airbus over the Persian Gulf, killing all 298 aboard. …”

Bleeding hearts for bloody terrorist

By Michelle Malkin

“…Crossing the line between compassion and coddling, Scotland has freed Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi. He served only eight years of a life sentence for the jihadi attack that took 270 innocent lives.

Scotland freed the terminally ill Lockerbie bomber on compassionate grounds Thursday, letting the Libyan go home to die despite American pleas to show no mercy for the man responsible for the 1988 attack that killed 270 people.

The White House declared it “deeply” regretted the Scottish decision as Abdel Baset al-Megrahi left Greenock Prison and flew to Libya on an Airbus dispatched to Glasgow Airport, still insisting he was innocent.

Scotland’s justice secretary said freeing the bomber was an expression of the Scottish people’s humanity but U.S. family members of Lockerbie victims expressed outrage.

“I think it’s appalling, disgusting and so sickening I can hardly find words to describe it,” said Susan Cohen, of Cape May Court House, New Jersey, whose 20-year-old daughter, Theodora, died in the attack. “This isn’t about compassionate release. This is part of give-Gadhafi-what-he-wants-so-we-can-have-the-oil.”

Some men outside the prison made obscene gestures as al-Megrahi’s prison van drove by toward the airport. Al-Megrahi, who had served only eight years of his life sentence, was recently given only months to live after being diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer.

Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said although al-Megrahi had not shown compassion to his victims — many of whom were American college students flying home to New York for Christmas — MacAskill was motivated by Scottish values to show mercy. …”

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 1/7

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 2/7

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 3/7

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 4/7

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 5/7

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 6/7

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt. III 7/7

Background Articles and Videos

Yuri Bezmenov, aka Tomas Schuman

“…Yuri Alexandrovic Bezmenov, now known as Tomas David Schuman, was born in 1939 in the former Soviet Union and worked as a journalist for Pravda. In this capacity, he secretly answered to the KGB. His true job was to further the aims of communist Russia. After being assigned to a station in India, Bezmenov eventually grew to love the people and culture of India, while, at the same time, he began to resent the KGB-sanctioned oppression of intellectuals who dissented from Moscow’s policies. He decided to defect to the West. Bezmenov/Schuman is best remembered for his Pro-American Anti-communist lectures and books from the 1980s.

In 1984, he gave an interview to G. Edward Griffin who, at that time, was a member of the John Birch Society, an anti-communist group. Bezmenov explained in this interview the methods used by the Soviet KGB to secretly subvert the democratic system of the United States[1].

Tomas D. Schuman authored the book Love Letter to America, W.I.N., Almanac Panorama, Los Angeles 1984, ISBN 0-935090-13-4. In Love Letter to America he writes, “Like a true-life Winston Smith, from the George Orwell book 1984, Tomas Schuman worked for the communist equivalent of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth – The Novosti Press Agency (RIA Novosti). Novosti, which means “News” in Russian, exists to produce slanted and false stories to plant in the foreign media. The term for this KGB effort is “disinformation”.

Tomas D. Schuman was associated with World Information Network (WIN) located at 31220 La Baya Dr. #110, Westlake, CA 91362. WIN published WIN PANORAMA books and cassettes along with the WIN Panorama Report newsletter. WIN also published under the name WIN Almanac Panorama, or ALmanac. In 1985, Tomas D. Schuman wrote No Novosti is Good News, Almanac, ISBN 0935090177 and in 1986 he wrote World Thought Police, Almanac, ASIN B0007246RO. An order form at the rear of Love Letter To America offers a book called KAL 007 and a cassette called “Radio Moscow” by Schuman.

Tomas Schuman (Yuri Bezmenov) L.A. 1983 pt.IV 1/2 lectured that the Soviet Union may have shot down flight Korean Air Lines Flight 007 aka KAL 007 to kill Larry McDonald, a member of the United States House of Representatives, representing the seventh congressional district of Georgia as a Democrat. In addition to being a congressman, Larry McDonald was chairman of the John Birch Society and considered communism an international conspiracy. McDonald was a founder of the Western Goals Foundation that combatted the threat of communism. McDonald introduced Resolution 773 calling for a comprehensive Congressional investigation into the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Trilateral Commission. A May 1983 broadcast of Crossfire, recorded months before Soviet interceptors shot down KAL 007, killing anti-communist Congressman McDonald along with 268 other souls, can be found on YouTube entitled Larry McDonald on the New World Order (NWO).

The whereabouts of Yuri Bezmenov, aka Tomas David Schuman, is unknown but unconfirmed internet sources report that he died in 1997 in Canada. The G. Edward Griffin interview along with many other lectures by Yuri Bezmenov aka Tomas Schuman can be viewed on YouTube. …”

SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR
THE OLDEST MILITARY TREATISE IN THE WORLD

Translated from the Chinese
By LIONEL GILES, M.A. (1910)

Sun Tzu

“…Sun Tzu (traditional Chinese: 孫子; simplified Chinese: 孙子; pinyin: Sūn Zi, pronounced [suən˥ tsz̩˨˩˦]. Sun is his family name, and Tzu is an honorific in classic Chinese[citation needed], roughly equivalent to Sir, or the Learned Gentleman. His given name is Wǔ (武). His style name is Chángqīng (長卿). Sun Tzu is traditionally believed to be the author of The Art of War, sometimes called the Sun Tzu, an influential ancient Chinese book on military strategy considered to be a prime example of Taoist strategy. Sun has had a significant impact on Chinese and Asian history and culture, both as an author of the Art of War and as a legendary figure. During the 19th and 20th centuries, Sun’s The Art of War grew in popularity and saw practical use in Western society, and his work has continued to influence both Asian and Western culture and politics.

Historians have questioned whether or not Sun was an authentic historical figure. Traditional accounts place him in the Spring and Autumn Period of China (722–481 BC) as a heroic general of the King of Wu who lived c. 544—496 BC. Scholars accepting his historicity place his supposed writing The Art of War in the Warring States Period (476–221 BC), based on the descriptions of warfare in the text. Traditional accounts state that his descendant, Sun Bin, also wrote a master treatise on military tactics. …”

Who is Sun Tzu

“…Hundreds of years before the birth of Christ, there was a period in China known as the Age of Warring States. This was an age of great conflict and uncertainty as seven states fought for survival & control of China. For these states to win they sought out any means of gaining advantage over their opponents; those with knowledge on strategy & leadership was especially sought after. It was during this time that there arose a general from the state of Ch’i known as Sun Tzu. His ability to win victories for his warlord gained him fame and power.

To hand down the wisdom he had gained from his years of battles Sun Tzu wrote a book, The Art of War, that became the classic work on strategy in China. His book, which details a complete philosophy on how to decisively defeat one’s opponent, has given guidance to military theorists and generals throughout the ages. In The Art of War, military readers found a holistic approach to strategy that was powerful and deep–it is truly a masterpiece on strategy. As the former U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell said, “I’ve read the Chinese classic The Art of War written by Sun Tzu. Sun Tzu has been studied for hundreds of years. He continues to give inspiration to soldiers and politicians. So every American soldier in the army knows of his works. We require our soldiers to read it.” …”

Obama’s CIA in turmoil; Panetta on the ledge; awaiting document dump

By Michelle Malkin

A “profanity-laced screaming match” at the White House involving CIA Director Leon Panetta, and the expected release today of another damning internal investigation, has administration officials worrying about the direction of its newly-appoint intelligence team, current and former senior intelligence officials tell ABC News.com.

Amid reports that Panetta had threatened to quit just seven months after taking over at the spy agency, other insiders tell ABCNews.com that senior White House staff members are already discussing a possible shake-up of top national security officials.

“You can expect a larger than normal turnover in the next year,” a senior adviser to Obama on intelligence matters told ABCNews.com.

…According to intelligence officials, Panetta erupted in a tirade last month during a meeting with a senior White House staff member. Panetta was reportedly upset over plans by Attorney General Eric Holder to open a criminal investigation of allegations that CIA officers broke the law in carrying out certain interrogation techniques that President Obama has termed “torture.”

“…Eric Holder, back in January: “Eric H. Holder Jr.’s confirmation as attorney general is speeding toward approval thanks in part to his private assurances to a key Republican senator that he does not intend to prosecute intelligence agency interrogators for their actions during the prior administration. The assurances, reported by Sen. Christopher S. Bond, Missouri Republican, to The Washington Times on Wednesday, went beyond Mr. Holder’s earlier public testimony in which he said he could not prejudge his actions regarding cases he had not seen.”

The Spy Who Came in from the Cold

“…The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1963), by John le Carré is a Cold War spy novel famous for its intricate plot and its portrait of the West’s espionage methods as inconsistent with Western values. In 1965, Martin Ritt directed a cinematic adaptation, with Richard Burton as protagonist Alec Leamas, British secret agent.

The novel received excellent reviews and was a best selling book; in 2006, Publishers Weekly named it “best spy novel of all-time”. [1][2]

“I am certain nothing has done so much to destroy the juridical safeguards of individual freedom as the striving after the mirage of social justice.”

“I have come to feel strongly that the greatest service I can still render to my fellow men would be that I could make the speakers and writers among them thoroughly ashamed ever again to employ the term ‘social justice’.”

~Friedrich A. Hayek

“I met all these young radical people of color — I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, ‘This is what I need to be a part of.’ I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary. I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th. By August, I was a communist.”

~Van Jones, Green Czar

aka, Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality

Glenn Beck Exposes Obama’s Czars- Green Czar Van Jones

O’Reilly & Beck Targeted by Radical Far Left Groups

Van Jones on ABC News

Van Jones on the Beatitudes Society

“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.”

~ Barack Obama, President

Apollo Alliance is the Biggest Story in American History

Glenn Beck: No One Took The Radical Barack Obama at His Word [FOX News]

AFP’s Phil Kerpen on Fox and Friends

Michael Savage reveals who Van Jones Is, Obama’s new Green Czar

Bill O’Reilly – George Soros is Buying Political Power

Alan Keyes rightly calls Obama a radical communist

Van Jones Keynote at Powershift 09

Phil Angelides

The APOLLO ALLIANCE – Good Jobs, Energy Independence

Jerome Ringo (1) – Building a Progressive Majority In The State1

Jerome Ringo (2) – Building a Progressive Majority In The State2

Jerome Ringo (3) – Building a Progressive Majority In The State2

Van Jones on “The Green Collar Economy”

Newarks’ Green Green Future Summit: Inside The Conference

Van Jones on Environmental Action

Jerome Ringo, President of the Apollo Alliance

Van Jones at Netroots Nation

Green Jobs for a Green Future: Green Roofing

Green Jobs, Green Future: Van Jones Takes Your Questions

Robert Murphy: Busting the Myth of Green Jobs

MAJOR REDUCTIONS IN CARBON EMISSIONS ARE NOT WORTH THE MONEY DEBATE: PETER HUBER

Big Business

Think Tanks

John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress

Joel Rogers, Director, Center on Wisconsin Strategy

Background Articles and Videos

Apollo Alliance

“…The Apollo Alliance is a project organized by the Institute for America’s Future and the Center on Wisconsin Strategy. Its goals include establishing energy independence for the United States of America, as well as developing cleaner and more efficient energy alternatives. Its allies are drawn from businesses, environmental organizations, and over 30 labor unions. …”

The ‘Ivan the Terrible’ of Obama’s Czars

“…How this guy got a job in government is beyond comprehension – unless you live in the United States under Barack Obama as president.

Meet Obama’s “Green Czar” Van Jones – former radical communist by his own admission, now a born again capitalist – at least when it comes to remaking the business world into an environmentally friendly sector.
World Net Daily has the background on his past:

Jones, formerly a self-described “rowdy black nationalist,” boasted in a 2005 interview with the left-leaning East Bay Express that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class “justice.”

Jones was president and founder of Green For All, a nonprofit organization that advocates for building a so-called inclusive green economy.

Until recently, Jones was a longtime member of the board of Apollo Alliance, a coalition of labor, business, environmental and community leaders that claims on its website to be “working to catalyze a clean energy revolution that will put millions of Americans to work in a new generation of high-quality, green-collar jobs.”

(Although influential, Apollo has only 14 state affiliates nationwide. Its New York office is directed by Jeff Jones, a top founding member of the Weather Underground radical organization.

Not only a former communist but a radical green to be sure. The idea of using the business community to achieve his goals is novel considering who he was running with in the past: …”

Green Jobs: Fast-tracking Economic Suicide

ByMichael Economides and Peter Glover

“…Creating ex nihilo — literally, out of nothing — used to be a theological concept, God’s prerogative. Today it seems, President Barack Obama and certain Western politicians claim to possess the ability to do it. Against all the laws of economics and the marketplace, they believe they can create millions of ‘green’ real jobs, out of thin air, or at least air without carbon dioxide, via cap and trade.

If Obama & Co. were to remove their green-tinted glasses for just a moment and take a long hard look at the European experience they profess to cite as ‘proven’, they would discover those glasses have been rose-tinted all along.

The basic assumption is that technology per se generates jobs. Mostly, it does not. Rather, technology enables jobs — real and sustainable jobs — based on how useful the technology is to the marketplace. To generate real industrial jobs, however, one needs a basic commodity to trade, and in the energy business this has meant oil, gas or coal. Yet ‘green’ politicians and eco-lobbyists expect to create a revolution in green jobs based on … alternative energy sources. The trouble is that alternative energy sources remain and will continue to be appallingly inefficient, offering a very poor to mostly negative return on investment. Cut off the flow of massive public subsidies and the alternative energy industrial revolution would grind to a halt tomorrow — as the European experience already bears out.

What the EU experience shows is that for every green job created per installed MW power, a real job is destroyed elsewhere in the economy. Not to mention, it aids the reduction of competitiveness, investment in expansion and, ultimately, promotes the relocation of major companies to countries without draconian carbon regimes that cause energy price hikes. …”

Van Jones

“…Van Jones (born 1968) is (since March 2009) the Special Advisor for Green Jobs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).[1]

He is an environmental advocate, a civil rights activist and attorney, and an author. Formerly based in Oakland, California, Jones is the founder of Green For All, a national NGO dedicated to “building an inclusive green economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty.”[2] His first book, The Green Collar Economy, released on October 7, 2008, was a New York Times bestseller.[3] Jones also founded the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, a California NGO working for alternatives to violence and incarceration.[4]

In 2008, Time magazine named Jones one of its “Environmental Heroes.”[5]Fast Company called him one of the “12 Most Creative Minds of 2008.”[6]

Van Jones

Became a Communist in the aftermath of the 1992 “Rodney King riots” in Los Angeles

Founded the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights in 1996

Was active in the anti-Iraq War demonstrations organized by International ANSWER

Served as a board member of the Rainforest Action Network and Free Press

In March 2009, President Barack Obama named Jones to be his so-called “Green Jobs Czar.” …”

“…By the late 1990s, Jones was a committed Marxist-Leninist-Maoist who viewed police officers as the arch-enemies of black people, and who loathed capitalism for allegedly exploiting nonwhite minorities worldwide. He became a leading member of Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), a Bay Area Marxist-Maoist collective that was staffed by members of various local nonprofits, a number of whom had ties to the Ella Baker Center.

A small but influential radical organization, STORM was founded in 1994 by a group of black anti-war activists who had demonstrated together against the Gulf War three years earlier. STORM became the guiding force behind several notable front groups, one of which was an anti-police collective called Bay Area Police Watch. Another STORM front was the School of Unity and Liberation (SOUL), which was a Marxist training organization; yet another was People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER), which agitated on behalf of the jobless. STORM would grow in influence until 2002, when it disbanded due to internal squabbles.

In the early 2000s, Jones and STORM were active in the anti-Iraq War demonstrations organized by International ANSWER, a front group for the Marxist-Leninist Workers World Party. STORM also had ties to the South African Communist Party and it revered Amilcar Cabral, the late Marxist revolutionary leader (of Guinea-Bissau and the Cape Verde Islands) who lauded Lenin as “the greatest champion of the national liberation of the peoples.” (In 2006 Van Jones would name his own newborn son “Cabral” — in Amilcar Cabral’s honor.)

During his tenure with STORM, Jones collaborated on numerous projects (including antiwar demonstrations) with local activist Elizabeth “Betita” Martinez, who served as a “mentor” for members of the Ella Baker Center. Martinez was a longtime Maoist who went on to join the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS), a Communist Party USA splinter group, in the early 1990s. To this day, Martinez continues to sit on the CCDS advisory board alongside such luminaries as Angela Davis, Timuel Black (who served on Barack Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign committee), and musician Pete Seeger. Martinez is also a board member of the Movement for a Democratic Society, the parent organization of Progressives for Obama. Martinez and Van Jones together attended a “Challenging White Supremacy” workshop which advanced the theme that “all too often, the unconscious racism of white activists stands in the way of any effective, worthwhile collaboration” with blacks.

In 2005 Jones and the Ella Baker Center produced the “Social Equity Track” for the United Nations’ World Environment Day celebration, a project that eventually would evolve into the Baker Center’s Green-Collar Jobs Campaign — “a job-training and employment pipeline providing ‘green pathways out of poverty’ for low-income adults in Oakland.” …”

Color of Change

“…Color of Change is a Web-based grassroots organization that aims to strengthen the political voice of Black America. It was formed after the events of Hurricane Katrina, a powerful storm that devastated much of the north-central Gulf Coast. Color of Change is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation and Color Of Change PAC is a 501(c)(4) non-profit corporation that engages in lobbying and public education.

Color of Change was co-founded in 2005 by James Rucker and Van Jones. Rucker had previously been Director of Grassroots Mobilization for MoveOn.org Political Action and MoveOn.org Civic Action (2003 – 2005). Van Jones is the founder and executive director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights.[1] Van Jones left the organization several years later to move on to other pursuits, such as Green For All.[2] Color of Change emerged in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, and was a leading advocate of the Jena Six, helping that cause gain increased media, national, and international attention. Color of Change is still working on issues associated with the aftermath of Katrina, particularly the availability of housing to those whose homes were lost or damaged. One of COC’s current campaigns is garnering support for Senate bill S.1668, which would repair and open thousands of minimally damaged public housing units.[3] …”

Video: Glenn Beck goes after Obama czar … who founded group that’s boycotting him

by Allahpundit

“…A short biographical sketch of revolutionary turned “green jobs czar” Van Jones that’s missing one tiny detail from his resume: He co-founded Color of Change, the lefty outfit that’s spearheading the much-publicized boycott of Beck that may or may not actually exist. It’s a little shady that Beck doesn’t disclose that here, although maybe he mentioned it at some other point in the show. Can anyone who watched from start to finish confirm or deny? Either way, consider this a vivid illustration of Karl’s theory that one of the reasons Obama’s gone czar-crazy is to bypass the Senate confirmation process. Imagine the field day the GOP would have with Jones’s past if he had to answer questions. …”

Jerome C. Ringo

“…Jerome C. Ringo (b. born on March 2, 1955) , an advocate for environmental justice, clean energy, and quality jobs, is the immediate past chairman of the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), and an associate research scholar and McCluskey Fellow for Conservation at Yale University.

In assuming the reins of the NWF in 2005, he became the first African American in history to chair a major conservation advocacy organization. Ringo is also president of the Apollo Alliance, a coalition of organized labor, environmentalist, business and civil rights leaders dedicated to freeing the United States of dependence on foreign oil. …”

GUIDE TO THE GEORGE SOROS NETWORK

“…George Soros is one of the most powerful men on earth. A New York hedge fund manager, he has amassed a personal fortune estimated at about $7.2 billion. His management company controls billions more in investor assets. Since 1979, his foundation network — whose flagship is the Open Society Institute (OSI) — has dispensed an estimated $5 billion to a multitude of organizations whose objectives are consistent with those of Soros. (The President of OSI and the Soros Foundation Network is Aryeh Neier, former Director of the socialist League for Industrial Democracy.) With assets of $859 million as of 2005, OSI alone donates scores of millions of dollars annually to these various groups, whose major agendas can be summarized as follows:

promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation

promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States

opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act

depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral

promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws

promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes

promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens

defending suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters

financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left

advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending

opposing the death penalty in all circumstances

promoting socialized medicine in the United States

promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is “not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization”

bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations

promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike …”

War erupts over Glenn Beck TV show: Fans fight back

Launch campaign against boycott group founded by Obama’s ‘environmental czar’

By Aaron Klein

“…Glenn Beck fans are fighting back against a campaign led by a black activist organization prompting major advertisers to withdraw from Beck’s top-rated Fox News Channel program.

Last week, NewsBusters reported President Obama’s “green jobs czar,” Van Jones, is co-founder of ColorofChange.org, an activist organization that has led a furious campaign against Beck culminating in major companies such as Geico and Lawyers.com pulling their spots from the Fox News star’s daily show.

In recent weeks, Beck has done several critical segments about Van Jones, who was appointed as the special adviser for green jobs, enterpriseand innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Beck’s segments were based in part on WND’s reporting that Jones was as an admitted radical communist and black nationalist leader. …”

“…Jones, formerly a self-described “rowdy black nationalist,” boasted in a 2005 interview with the left-leaning East Bay Express that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class “justice.”

Jones was president and founder of Green For All, a nonprofit organization that advocates building a so-called inclusive green economy.

Until recently, Jones was a longtime member of the board of Apollo Alliance, a coalition of labor, business, environmental and community leaders that claims on its website to be “working to catalyze a clean energy revolution that will put millions of Americans to work in a new generation of high-quality, green-collar jobs.”

He was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. The organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area.

STORM worked with known communist leaders. It led the charge in black protests against various issues, including a local attempt to pass Proposition 21, a ballot initiative that sought to increase the penalties for violent crimes and require more juvenile offenders to be tried as adults.

Communist Green Jobs Czar’s Group Takes Aim at TV’s Glenn Beck

by Matthew Vadum

“…The particularly unsavory left-wing pressure group Color of Change has an axe to grind with Glenn Beck — and it’s personal.

The extremist racial grievance group isn’t happy that Beck did several news packages on Van Jones, President Obama’s controversial green jobs czar who describes himself as a communist. (Green really is the new red.)

Jones is a founding board member of Color of Change, but Color of Change doesn’t want you to know that. Maybe having an avowed America-hating radical on the group’s board is bad public relations.

The group deleted references to Jones on its “about” page. That page used to say, “James Rucker and Van Jones came together in the wake of [Hurricane] Katrina to use the organizing power of the Internet to give Black Americans and our allies a renewed and strengthened political voice.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) on Hannity

The vast majority of the American people do not want either a public option/government health insurer or a single payer/government monopoly of health care–socialized medicine.

President Obama and the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party want the public option because they believe that it would eliminate over time insurance companies and lead eventually to a single payer government monopoly of health care–socialized medicine.

If a health care bill is passed that includes the public option, the Democratic Party can expect to lose control of the House of Representatives and lose a few Senate seats in 2010.

If the health care, cap and trade energy tax, and comprehensive immigration reform bills are all passed, the Democratic Party can expect to lose control of the House, Senate and White House in 2012.

So what does President Obama do?

Barack Obama is first and foremost a front man, he will do what his campaign contributors and suporters expect him to do–the unions and socialists want the public option to eventually get to a single payer system:

AFL-CIO Pushed Public Option

SEIU’s Anna Burger On MSNBC: Public Option, Not Co-Ops, Necessary To Hold Down Health Costs

President Obama will push for the public option and as a result the Democrats will lose between 25 to 40 seats in the next election and another 25 to 40 seats in 2012.

What happened to the Republican Party in 2006 and 2008 will happen to the Democratic Party in 2010 and 2012.

Call it hubris or the arrogance of power, I call American people payback.

The time is ripe for the formation of a third political party, call it the American Citizens Alliance Party, that will actually listen to and reflect the wishes of the majority of the American people .

The Amercian people want the FairTax, stopping and reversing illegal immigration, affordable, fair, portable, individual health insurance, energy independence with nuclear electrical power, balanced budgets, and yes–full employment by creating wealth not destroying or redistributing to a political supporters such as union, trial lawyers, and Wall Street commercial and investment banks.

Time to take the red, white and blue pill and not the the poison pill–compulsory health insurance with a public option that leads to a government monopoly of health care–socialized medicine.

Letter from a Whole Foods worker Updated

By Michelle Malkin

Their food is pricey, but if you have a chance/opportunity to help counter the boycott, go out and buy a few Whole Foods items. I think it’s worth it.

Reader Tara, a Whole Foods employee, e-mailed me last night:

Hey Michelle, just got your book, and can’t put it down! But anyways, I’ve attached the lovely flyer that picketers from UFCW were hanging out at my Whole Food Market today. Thought you’d get a kick out of it!! I work for Whole Foods, and I am a long time loyal employee. I love our company, and our CEO! John Mackey stands for what he cares about and believes in! This company offers awesome benefits and puts us team members first! I had to email everyone this flyer and get the word about because this is ridiculous. Any help getting the work out that this is ridiculous would be great! I’m sure you probably know all about his craziness, so any help would be great! Thank you!

The flyer is quite a piece of work. Check out how they make Mackey look like a convicted criminal:

Headed to my local Whole Foods later today. Their 365 whole wheat naan is the best.

Rasmussen Report:

Without Public Option, Enthusiasm for Health Care Reform, Especially Among Democrats, Collapses

“…These results suggest that the president has difficult choices ahead. A solid majority of unaffiliated voters are opposed to passing health care reform legislation with or without the public option. However, failure to pass a plan of any kind could create additional difficulties for the president, and a plan without the public option does not have the enthusiastic support of his base. This helps explain why, according to the New York Times, senior Democrats are considering going it alone on the reform plan without trying to get any Republican support for it.

Other recent Rasmussen Reports polling highlights the underlying political challenges. Thirty-two percent (32%) of voters favor a single-payer health care system.These voters make up a heavy majority of those who favor passage of health care reform. They view the current legislation as a baby step along the way to a single-payer system. Most Americans oppose a single-payer system and are seeking reassurance that the current plan will not head in that direction.

Overall, when it comes to health care decisions, 51% fear the government more than private insurance companieswhile 41% hold the opposite view.

Most Americans support the concept of reform, but cost control is seen as the most important aspect of reform.Also, voters simply don’t believe the legislation will deliver the benefits that its advocates claim. Few believe it will increase patient choice or make health care affordable.In fact, most voters believe the passage of the current health care reform effort will lead to higher costs and lower quality of care. …”

Debatt med Peter Singer Del 1

Debatt med Peter Singer Del 2

Debatt med Peter Singer Del 3

Debatt med Peter Singer Del 4

Debatt med Peter Singer Del 5

Peter Singer interviewed on Point Of Inquiry episode1 1/4

Peter Singer interviewed on Point Of Inquiry episode1 2/4

Peter Singer interviewed on Point Of Inquiry episode1 3/4

Peter Singer interviewed on Point Of Inquiry episode1 4/4

Background Articles and Videos

Peter Singer

“…Peter Albert David Singer (born July 6, 1946) is an Australian philosopher. He is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and laureate professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics (CAPPE), University of Melbourne. He specializes in applied ethics, approaching ethical issues from a secular preference utilitarian perspective.

He has served, on two occasions, as chair of philosophy at Monash University, where he founded its Centre for Human Bioethics. In 1996, he ran unsuccessfully as a Green candidate for the Australian Senate. In 2004, he was recognized as the Australian Humanist of the Year by the Council of Australian Humanist Societies.

Outside academic circles, Singer is best known for his book Animal Liberation, widely regarded as the touchstone of the animal liberation movement. Not all members of the animal liberation movement share this view, and Singer himself has said the media overstates his status. His views on that and other issues in bioethics have attracted attention and a degree of controversy. …”

“…Almost a third of all unborn babies in America have their lives terminated each year with the consent of their mothers. Fifty million since Roe v. Wade have never seen the light of day. For many, the quality of life now supersedes in value the sanctity of life. That is who we are.

Between 2012 and 2030, 74 million baby boomers will retire, cease to be the major contributors to Medicare and become the major drain on Medicare. How long will an overtaxed labor force in a de-Christianized America be wiling to pay the bill to keep all those aging boomers alive?

Rationed care is coming, and the death panels will not be far behind.”

Your Life–Your Choices

Expect President Obama’s popularity to fall below 40% in September, when the unemployment rate hits 10%.

The Death Book for Veterans

Ex-soldiers don’t need to be told they’re a burden to society.

By JIM TOWEY

“…If President Obama wants to better understand why America’s discomfort with end-of-life discussions threatens to derail his health-care reform, he might begin with his own Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). He will quickly discover how government bureaucrats are greasing the slippery slope that can start with cost containment but quickly become a systematic denial of care.

Last year, bureaucrats at the VA’s National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, “Your Life, Your Choices.” It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA’s preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated “Your Life, Your Choices.”

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing.

“Your Life, Your Choices” presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political “push poll.” For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be “not worth living.” …”

Every Cent You Make (I’ll be taxing you)

The Day ObamaCare Died – Radio Broadcast – Bye Bye Miss American Pie

Background Articles and Videos

By Tom Blumer

“…If you were a reporter trying to gauge the credibility of Obama administration protests that it is really serious when it says that it will honor patient, doctor, and family treatment wishes in serious illness situations if the government takes an exponentially greater role in health care, you might look into how areas of health care already controlled by the government are dealing with these sensitive matters.

Apparently either no journalist has cared to look, or if anyone has looked, they haven’t found anything they believe is worth reporting.

In today’s Wall Street Journal, Jim Towey, a former director of the Bush White House’s Office of Faith-Based Initiatives and founder of the nonprofit Aging with Dignity, found a troubling, newsworthy, death-encouraging decision that has already been made during Barack Obama’s short term in office. …”

“…One can only imagine a soldier surviving the war in Iraq and returning without all of his limbs only to encounter a veteran’s health-care system that seems intent on his surrender.

I was not surprised to learn that the VA panel of experts that sought to update “Your Life, Your Choices” between 2007-2008 did not include any representatives of faith groups or disability rights advocates. And as you might guess, only one organization was listed in the new version as a resource on advance directives: the Hemlock Society (now euphemistically known as “Compassion and Choices”).

This hurry-up-and-die message is clear and unconscionable. Worse, a July 2009 VA directive instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to “Your Life, Your Choices.” Not just those of advanced age and debilitated condition—all patients. America’s 24 million veterans deserve better.”

BY David Saltonstall

“…In reality, the bill section simply aims to provide Medicare coverage for once-every-five-year conversations with doctors over what life-prolonging measures, if any, a patient wants taken in the event of a terminal illness or injury. It’s an idea first championed by a conservative Republican senator, Johnny Isakson of Georgia.

But McCaughey took that section and ran with it, providing backup for Palin and right-wing media pot-stirrers to sound the “death panel” alarm.

McCaughey got the ball rolling on ex-Sen. Fred Thompson‘s radio show on July 16, when she called the bill “a vicious assault on elderly people” that will “cut your life short.”

She then wrote a column July 24 that claimed Obama advisers don’t want to “give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson’s or a child with cerebral palsy.”

Palin then unleashed her “death panel” comment, basing it on Bachmann’s floor speech. And the firestorm raged.

The father of a wheelchair-bound son with cerebral palsy recently shouted down 83-year-old Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) at a town hall meeting. He then brandished McCaughey’s article on Fox News to explain his anger.

“Every American should pull this up on their computer,” Mike Sola said on Fox – and many apparently did.

The Bloody History of Communism (8 of 14)

The Bloody History of Communism (9 of 14)

The Bloody History of Communism (10 of 14)

The Bloody History of Communism (11 of 14)

The Bloody History of Communism (12 of 14)

The Bloody History of Communism (13 of 14)

The Bloody History of Communism (14 of 14)

Background Articles and Videos

Communism

“…Communism (from Latin: communis = “common”) is a family of economic and political ideas and social movements related to the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, or stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general, as well as the name given to such a society.[1][2][3] The term “Communism”, usually spelled with the capital letter C, is however often used to refer to a form of government in which the state operates under a one-party system and declares allegiance to Marxism-Leninism or a derivative thereof, even if the party does not actually claim that the society has already reached communism.

Forerunners of communist ideas existed in antiquity and particularly in the 18th and early 19th century France, with thinkers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the more radical Gracchus Babeuf. Radical egalitarianism then emerged as a significant political power in the first half of 19th century in Western Europe. In the world shaped by the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution, the newly established political left included many various political and intellectual movements, which are the direct ancestors of today’s communism and socialism – these two then newly minted words were almost interchangeable at the time – and of anarchism or anarcho-communism. The two most influential theoreticians of communism of the 19th century were Germans Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, authors of Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848), who also helped to form the first openly communist political organisations and firmly tied communism with the idea of working class revolution conducted by the exploited proletariat (or the working class). Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in human society, which would be achieved after an intermediate stage called socialism, and through the temporary and revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. Communism in the Marxist sense refers to a classless, stateless, and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made directly and democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life. Some “revisionist” Marxists of the following generations, henceforth known as reformists or social democrats, have slowly drifted away from the revolutionary views of Marx, instead arguing for a gradual parliamentary road to socialism; other communists, such as Rosa Luxemburg or Vladimir Lenin, continued to agitate and argue for world revolution.

The Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin, were brought to power by the Russia Revolution of 1917, where the Tsarist regime disrupted by World War I was smashed by the world’s first workers revolution. After years of civil war (1917–1921), international isolation, erosion of the soviets (workers and peasants’ councils) and internal struggle within the Bolshevik leadership, the Soviet Union was founded (1922). Lenin died after a second stroke in 1924, and despite of his warnings was succeeded by Joseph Stalin. Once in power, Stalin carried out multiple purges of dissidents and left communists/opposition, particularly of those around Leon Trotsky, and established the character of Communism as the totalitarian ideology it is most commonly known as and referred to today. The Soviet Union emerged as a new global superpower on the victorious side of World War II. In the five years after the World War, Communist regimes were established in many states of Central and Eastern Europe and in China. Communism began to spread its influence in the Third World while continuing to be a significant political force in many Western countries. International relations between the Soviet Bloc and the West, led by USA, quickly worsened after the end of the war and the Cold War began, a continuing state of conflict, tension and competition between the United States and the Soviet Union and those countries’ respective allies. The “Iron curtain” between West and East then divided Europe and world from the mid-1940s to the early 1990s. Despite many Communist successes like the victorious Vietnam War (1959-1975) or the first human spaceflight (1961), the Communist regimes were ultimately unable to keep up with their Western rivals. People under Communist regimes showed their discontent in events like the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, Prague Spring of 1968 or Polish Solidarity movement in early 1980s, most of which were ironically led by or included masses of workers. After 1985, the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev tried to implement market and democratic reforms under policies like perestroika (“restructuring”) and glasnost (“transparency”). His reforms sharpened internal conflicts in the Communist regimes and quickly led to the Revolutions of 1989 and a total collapse of European Communist regimes outside of the Soviet Union, which itself dissolved two years later (1991). Some Communist regimes outside of Europe have survived to this day, the most important of them being the People’s Republic of China, whose Socialism with Chinese characteristics attempts to introduce market reforms without western style democratisation and with the introduction of new capitalist and middle classes. …”

Socialism

“…Socialism refers to various theories of economic organization advocating state, public or common worker (e.g. through cooperatives) ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with an egalitarian method of compensation.[1][2][3] Modern socialism originated in the late 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticized the effects of industrialization and private ownership on society, however, socialism itself is not a political system; it is instead an economic system distinct from capitalism. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels used the terms “socialism” and “communism” interchangeably, and posited that it would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution.[4] Vladimir Lenin, perhaps influenced by Marx’s ideas of “lower” and “upper” stages of socialism[5], later used the word “socialism” as a transitional stage between capitalism and communism.

The utopian socialists, including Robert Owen (1771–1858), tried to found self-sustaining communes by secession from a capitalist society. Henri de Saint Simon (1760–1825), the first individual to coin the term socialism, was the original thinker who advocated technocracy and industrial planning. The first socialists predicted a world improved by harnessing technology and combining it with better social organization, and many contemporary socialists share this belief. Early socialist thinkers tended to favor an authentic meritocracy combined with rational social planning, while many modern socialists have a more egalitarian approach.

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, creates an unequal society, does not provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximize their potentialities and does not utilize technology and resources to their maximum potential nor in the interests of the public. Therefore socialists advocate the creation of a society that allows for the widespread application of modern technology to rationalize the economy by eliminating the anarchy in production of capitalism[6], allowing for wealth and power to be distributed more evenly based on the amount of work expended in production, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how and to what extent this could be achieved.

Socialism is not a concrete philosophy of fixed doctrine and program; its branches advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization, usually in the form of economic planning, sometimes opposing each other. Another dividing feature of the socialist movement is the split between reformists and the revolutionaries on how a socialist economy should be established. Some socialists advocate complete nationalization of the means of production, distribution, and exchange; others advocate state control of capital within the framework of a market economy. Socialists inspired by the Soviet model of economic development have advocated the creation of centrally planned economies directed by a state that owns all the means of production. Others, including Yugoslavian, Hungarian, German and Chinese Communists in the 1970s and 1980s, instituted various forms of market socialism, combining co-operative and state ownership models with the free market exchange and free price system (but not free prices for the means of production).[7]

Social democrats propose selective nationalization of key national industries in mixed economies, while maintaining private ownership of capital and private business enterprise. Social democrats also promote tax-funded welfare programs and regulation of markets. Many social democrats, particularly in European welfare states, refer to themselves as “socialists”, introducing a degree of ambiguity to the understanding of what the term means.

Libertarian socialism (including social anarchism and libertarian Marxism) rejects state control and ownership of the economy altogether and advocates direct collective ownership of the means of production via co-operative workers’ councils and workplace democracy.

The Bloody History of Communism

“…Communism was the bloodiest ideology that caused more than 120 million innocent deaths in the 20th century. It was a nightmare which promised equality and justice, but which brought only bloodshed, death, torture and fear. This three-volume documentary displays the terrible savagery of communism and its underlying philosophy. From Marx to Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot, discover how the materialist philosophy transforms humans into theorists of violence and masters of cruelty. …”

ACORNcracked.com tracks down ACORN founder Wade Rathke

ACORNcracked.com On the ACORN trail

Glenn Beck – 7/29/2009: Cracking ACORN

foxnews – glenn beck – one more thing “no one took barack obama at his word” – 07/28/2009

George Soros and Acorn in the 2008 Elections

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured (Generated) Crisis

Cloward Piven Strategy

“…Strategy for forcing political change through orchestrated crisis

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles (which erupted after police had used batons to subdue a black man suspected of drunk driving), Cloward and Piven published an article titled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty” in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Following its publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called “crisis strategy” or “Cloward-Piven Strategy,” as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when “the rest of society is afraid of them,” Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven’s early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1972 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. …”

Background Articles and Videos

Frances Fox Piven PhD – Air date: 02-06-08

Mark Levin: The Cloward-Piven & Obama strategy

CHANDLER: The Cloward-Piven strategy

Using the poor to tear down capitalism

“…There is plenty blame to go around for the financial crash. Yet, there is a distinct odor of the shadowy Cloward-Piven strategy as the taproot of abusive practices that triggered the crisis. The strategy’s goal is to bring about the fall of capitalism by overloading and undermining government bureaucracy.

Its supporting tactics include flooding government with impossible demands until it slowly cranks to a stop; overloading electoral systems with successive tidal waves of new voters, many of them bogus; shaking down banks, politicians in Congress, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development for affirmative-action borrowing; and, now, pulling down the national financial system by demanding exotic, subprime mortgages for low-income Americans with little hope of repaying their loans. These toxic mortgages are an important source of the foul smell engulfing the entire financial bailout.

Developed in the mid-1960s by two Columbia University sociologists, Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, much of their strategy was drawn from Saul Alinsky, Chicago’s notorious revolutionary Marxist community organizer. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) succeeded the National Welfare Rights Organization in the execution of the Cloward-Piven grand tactics of using the poor as cannon fodder to tear down the capitalist system. It was low-income, mostly black and Hispanic people, who were used by ACORN guerrillas to take subprime toxic mortgages. …”

Cloward-Piven Strategy

“…The Cloward-Piven strategy refers to a political strategy outlined by Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, then both sociologists and political activists at the Columbia University School of Social Work, in a 1966 article in The Nation. The two argued that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would create a political crisis that would force U.S. politicians, particularly the Democratic Party, to enact legislation “establishing a guaranteed national income.”[1] …”

The Strategy

“…Cloward and Piven’s article is focused on forcing the Democratic Party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress, to take federal action to help the poor. They argued that full enrollment of those eligible for wellfare “would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments” that would “deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the white working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.”[2] They wrote “the ultimate objective of this strategy (is) to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income… (via)the outright redistribution of income.” …”

Cloward-Piven.com

“…In its earliest form, the Cloward-Piven strategy applied Alinsky’s principle to the specific area of welfare entitlements. It counseled activists to create what might be called Trojan Horse movements – mass movements whose outward purpose seemed to be providing material help to the downtrodden, but whose real purpose was to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers.

The specific function of these Trojan Horse movements was to mobilize poor people en masse to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet. The flood of demands was calculated to break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down. Fear, turmoil, violence and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown – providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change. That, at least, was the theory behind the Cloward-Piven strategy. …”

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

~Saul Alinsky’s, Rules for Radicals

Joker vs Joker (Jack Nicholson vs Heath Ledger)

President Obama, the Joker of the Progressive Radical Socialist Democratic Party, has a character flaw–he lies habitually.

Keeping up with Obama’s daily lying is a full time job.

Correcting him is an endless and thankless task because you will be called a racist for pointing out the lies by his Kool Aid Kids.

I’d Rather Be Called Racist than Comrade…

The American people are slowly but surely catching on that the Joker is truth challenged and the joke of health care reform is on the American people.

Take for example the often repeated line in the health care debate that the government public option insurer is there to increase competition with the insurance industry and to keep the insurance companies honest.

Obama on single payer health insurance

SHOCK UNCOVERED: Obama IN HIS OWN WORDS saying His Health Care Plan will ELIMINATE private insurance

Really.

If you are for a single payer or a government monopoly of health care–socialized medicine–then you do not want to do anything that increases competition or choice among health care insurance providers–you want to eliminate or destroy competition.

The author of the public option idea, Jacob Hacker, makes it very clear that the real purpose of the public option is drive the insurance companies out of business over a period of time.

Hacker admits Public Option is Trojan Horse for Single Payer

The Real Goal of the Public Plan Option – Squeezing Out Private & Employer-Based Health Insurance

What would be the results over time of a “public option insurer”–less competition and eventually a government monopoly of health care:

Obama’s Hearth Care Deception – “Public Option” will end up “Single Payer”, per their Plan

Paul Ryan Offers Amendment to Strike Government-Run Health Care Plan

The “Public Option” Myth

Ann Coulter’s On Health Care Reform

Cato Experts Dissect Obama’s Health Care Town Hall Meeting

Robert Moffit testifying on Health Care

The American people want affordable, portable and private individual health insurance plan that they chose to buy that meets their needs.

The way to accomplish this is to first make premiums paid for such health insurance coverage tax deductible.

The result would an immediate increase in competition in the health insurance market and declining premiums.

Encourage the purchase of catastrophic or high-deductible health insurance plans and the opening and funding of a health savings account that would be used to pay medical bills under the deductible amount.

DeMint on Health Savings Accounts

Health Savings Accounts

The Democratic Party blocked the above reforms and are out to destroy private insurance and health savings accounts. The last thing the Democrats want is more competition that would bring the price of health insurance down.

The Democractic Party are trying to kill both private individual health insurance and health savings accounts.

The Democratic Party does not give a damn about the American people’s health care.

President Obama, the unions such as SEIU and AFL-CIO, and the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party are out to destroy jobs, wreck the US economy and kill the American dream by proposing a health care reform bill with the goal establishing a single payer government monopoly over health care.

Judge Napolitano on Government vs Private Enterprise

The Dark Knight – Hospital Scene

Bee Gees – Stayin’ Alive (Full Version)

Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk,
I’m a woman’s man, no time to talk.
Music loud and women warm.
I’ve been kicked around since I was born.
And now it’s all right, it’s O.K.
And you may look the other way.
We can try to understand
The New York Times’ effect on man.
Whether you’re a brother
Or whether you’re a mother,
You’re stayin’ alive, stayin’ alive.
Feel the city breakin’
And ev’rybody shakin’
And we’re stayin’ alive, stayin’ alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin’ alive.
Stayin’ alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin’ alive.
Well now, I get low and I get high
And if I can’t get either I really try.
Got the wings of heaven on my shoes
I’m a dancin’ man and I just can’t lose.
You know it’s all right, it’s O.K.
I’ll live to see another day.
We can try to understand
The New York Times’ effect on man.
Whether you’re a brother
Or whether you’re a mother,
You’re stayin’ alive, stayin’ alive.
Feel the city breakin’
And ev’rybody shakin’
And we’re stayin’ alive, stayin’ alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin’ alive.
Stayin’ alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin’ alive.
Life goin’ nowhere.
Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Life goin’ nowhere.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Stayin’ alive
Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk,
I’m a woman’s man, no time to talk.
Music loud and women warm.
I’ve been kicked around since I was born.
And now it’s all right, it’s O.K.
And you may look the other way.
We can try to understand
The New York Times’ effect on man.
Whether you’re a brother
Or whether you’re a mother,
You’re stayin’ alive, stayin’ alive.
Feel the city breakin’
And ev’rybody shakin’
And we’re stayin’ alive, stayin’ alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin’ alive.
Stayin’ alive.
Ah, ha, ha, ha,
Stayin’ alive.
Life goin’ nowhere.
Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Life goin’ nowhere.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Stayin’ alive
Life goin’ nowhere.
Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Life goin’ nowhere.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Stayin’ alive

Background Articles and Videos

Opportunity Is Knocking

Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me

by David Horowitz

“…Glenn Beck will be on vacation this week but when he returns on the 24th he has invited me to come to New York to talk to him on camera about Saul Alinsky, the strategy guru of the Obama era. For the the Hillary-Soros generation of johnny-come-lately radicals and their ACORN footsoldiers, Alinksy is their Sun-Tzu and his book Rules for Radicals is the field manual for their struggle. I thought while I’m refreshing my acquaintance with this destructive fellow and re-reading his text, I would share my thoughts with you, serially over the next week. …”

Barack Obama as The Joker: A New American Phenomenon?

Obama Joker Poster Popping Up In Los Angeles

“…Apparently, it’s beginning to appear in odd places in Los Angeles, but nobody seems to know who’s responsible for it.

Radio host Tammy Bruce posted some pictures of this odd creation at her blog Saturday morning (h/t Pamela Geller) leading me to investigate further.

At this point, all I could find on the subject was an April 25 article from Bedlam Magazine:

A poster of Barack Obama in Heath Ledger-style Joker make-up with the legend ‘Socialism’ beneath it has been popping up recently on surfaces around L.A. It does not appear to be in the same category as the many benign take-offs on the Shepard Fairey ‘Hope’ poster, such as the one by Australian James Lillis (more of a straightforward spoof that merely substituted a Shepardized image of Heath Ledger as Joker on the Obama poster). …”

FIN Special Report MSNBC Asks Is Obama Joker Socialist Poster Racist

Hannity and Malkin Discuss DNC Health Care Web Ad

The Alinskyite’s Big, Fat Governance Failure

“…What happens when the thing a president knows best is a set of tactics designed to take power from the “haves”? When the most highly prized info a president ever garnered could be summed up as nothing better than gaming an electoral system with ACORN pay-for-registration schemes?

What happens when a president is very skilled in deceptively cloaking these less-than-altruistic means in rhetorical “moral garments” and his lies finally start catching up with him, destroying his credibility? When a president has never actually run anything successfully, not even his own paper route or a PTA meeting or a small town’s city council?

What happens when power-grab tactics, taught by a rabble-rousing revolutionary, suddenly catapult a charismatic demagogue into the highest power-perch in the world?

Pros and Cons of Catastrophic Health Insurance

“…Catastrophic health insurance plans—more formally known as High Deductible Health Plans (HDHPs)—were created as a way to lower overall medical costs by providing a lower monthly premium in exchange for a higher annual health insurance deductible. With catastrophic health insurance plans, you pay for almost all medical care until you reach the annual deductible amount. After that, traditional health insurance coverage begins.

By Seton Motley

“…The media have repeatedly stated how “angry,” “hostile” and “ugly” town hall meetings across America are becoming. They are of course largely ascribing the nastiness to conservatives voicing their opposition to (among other things) President Barack Obama and Congress’ proposed government takeover of the health care system.

The press has been particularly offended by the “extreme” use of references to Adolf Hitler specifically and Nazis generally. One image they have repeatedly used as an example of this alleged right-wing extremism is a poster of President Obama – on whose face a Hitler mustache has been Photo Shopped – bearing the caption “I’ve Changed.” …”

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

“…The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis

In an earlier post, I noted the liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress – with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why?

One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.

I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent – the failure is deliberate. Don’t laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse. …”

Mark Steyn on The Michael Coren Show – Part 4

Mark Steyn on The Michael Coren Show – Part 5

Dennis Miller interviews Mark Steyn, June 16, 2009. Part 1/2

Dennis Miller interviews Mark Steyn, June 16, 2009. Part 1/2

Mark Steyn – America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It – Part 1 of 4

Mark Steyn – America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It – Part 2 of 4

Mark Steyn – America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It – Part 3 of 4

Mark Steyn – America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It – Part 4 of 4

Mark Steyn on America, Europe and Islam (1 of 4)

Mark Steyn on America, Europe and Islam (2 of 4)

Mark Steyn on America, Europe and Islam (3 of 4)

Mark Steyn on America, Europe and Islam (4 of 4)

Mark Steyn Speech at CPAC – Part 1 of 5

Mark Steyn Speech at CPAC – Part 2 of 5

Mark Steyn Speech at CPAC – Part 3 of 5

Mark Steyn Speech at CPAC – Part 4 of 5

Mark Steyn Speech at CPAC – Part 5 of 5

Mark Steyn Video

TVO – Agenda with Steve Paikin – Mark Steyn Part 1 of 2

TVO – Agenda with Steve Paikin – Mark Steyn Part 1 of 2

TVO – The Agenda – Maclean’s & Islamophobia Part 1 of 5

TVO – The Agenda – Maclean’s & Islamophobia Part 2 of 5

TVO – The Agenda – Maclean’s & Islamophobia Part 5 of 5

Mark Steyn on Multiculturalism

Background Articles and Videos

Mark Steyn

“…Mark Steyn (born 1959) is a Canadian writer, political commentator and cultural critic. He has written five books, including America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It, a New York Times bestseller. He

“Capitalism means free enterprise, sovereignty of the consumers in economic matters, and sovereignty of the voters in political matters. Socialism means full government control of every sphere of the individuals life and the unrestricted supremacy of the government in its capacity as central board of production management.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Bureaucracy, page 10.

Obama on single payer health insurance

The Public Plan Deception – It’s Not About Choice

Glenn Beck Special – The Death Of Small Business

NFIB’s Todd Stottlemyer on the Health Care Debate (Part 1)

NFIB’s Todd Stottlemyer on the Health Care Debate (Part 2)

US Senator Saxby Chambliss debunking the 47 million uninsured

“47 Million Uninsured” Lie Explained – Mark Levin

Obama wants to destroy our healthcare: Mark Levin on Hannity

US Healthcare: A Short History

Why Is Healthcare So Expensive?

Medicare

Health Care Rally / Dr. Sally Pipes Part ONE

Health Care Rally / Dr. Sally Pipes Part TWO

Health Care Rally / Dr. Sally Pipes Part THREE

What will ObamaCare mean for you?

Much of the attention in the health care reform debate is being focused on the public option–the pathway to a single payer government monopoly of health care–socialized medicine.

Forgotten or not emphasized is the fact that the Federal Government under the proposed health care bills will require all individuals to purchase a qualified health care insurance plan if they do not have a health care plan from their employer or from the Federal Government such as Medicare or Medicaid.

The Democratic Party is telling the American people what they must spend their money on, namely an approved or qualified health insurance plan.

President Obama and his progressive radical socialist Democratic Party want to replace consumer sovereignty with government sovereignty, free enterprise with government command and control, and competition with monopoly in health care.

If you do not purchase such a government approved qualified health insurance plan for yourself and family, the Federal Government, namely the IRS will take money out of your checking account as a tax and fine to pay for the premium.

The majority of the people who do not have a health insurance plan are the young, the unemployed, and those working for small businesses or the self-employed that are not in a financial position to offer a group health care plan to their employees.

Many of the young Obama voters who think they will be getting “free” health care are in for a big surprise should a health care reform bill be enacted.

Yet the vast majority of health care expenditures are for the elderly, those on Medicare or for the very young.

In less than two years the first of the baby boomer generation, born between 1946 and 1964, the sons and daughters of the Greatest Generation, will become eligible for Medicare and Social Security.

Yet Medicare and within a few years Social Security are running deficits that are projected to be enormous as the entire baby boom generation becomes eligible for Medicare and Social Security.

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: Social Security+Medicare Projections

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: A $53 Trillion Federal Financial Hole

The payroll taxes for Medicare are simply not adequate to pay the medical, doctor and hospital bills of those covered by Medicare.

The Federal Government needs the insurance premiums paid by young and working Americans to pay for the health care benefits of the elderly.

Since the young and working age Americans have relatively less medical expenses than those on Medicare, a significant portion of the premiums paid by working and younger Americans could go to pay the cost of the elderly if there were a single payer system government monopoly over all health care premiums.

Currently doctors, hospitals and other providers shift the unreimbursed cost from Medicare and Medicaid to patients with private health care insurance.

The Federal Government simply is not paying its bills and is being subsidized by private sector employers, employees and individuals who purchase private insurance coverage or pay cash.

Cost Shifting in Health Care

Will Fox testifies before Congress

The problem is not private health insurance but government health insurance, namely Medicare and Medicaid.

Part 6: 5/8/09 John Stossel’s “You Can’t Even Talk About It”

Thus it is not surprising that President Obama and the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party favor a single payer system to bailout the Government at least for a few more years before the coming crisis and bankruptcy of Medicare and Medicaid.

The public option is the means to destroy competition and eventually eliminate private health insurance in the United States.

To accomplish this the Federal Government must first coerce all Americans who do not chose to purchase health insurance to either buy an approved plan or have the money taken out of their checking accounts.

You cannot have an honest debate about health care reform when the President of the United States repeatedly lies to the American people about the both the problem and his proposed solution.

You cannot have an honest debate about health care reform when tort reform will never be considered or enacted because the trial bar or attorneys give over 90% of their campaign contributions to the Democratic Party for the purpose of blocking tort reform.

Frivolous law suits result in rising medical malpractice insurance premiums and unnecessary medical testing and procedures directly impact the cost of medical care.

You cannot have an honest debate about health care reform when you hide the fact that Medicare and Medicaid cost are the real problem.

Medicare is a multi-generational ponzi scheme that is running on empty and profoundly immoral.

Now President Obama wants to make Medicare or socialized medicine universal–this would be fiscally irresponsible, destroy businesses and jobs and wreck the economy of the United States.

President Obama and the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party are attacking and demonizing doctors, the insurance industry, and the American people for daring to questioning his health insurance reform plan.

President Obama is not a leader on health care reform, he is a lying confidence man and extortionist.

If the Democratic Party truly cared about uninsured Americans, it could have joined decades ago with the Republican Party to give individuals the same tax advantages for individual health care insurance that employers have in deducting the premiums paid from their taxes for group insurance.

Instead the Democratic Party blocked such reform because that would not help their goal of a single payer universal health care or socialized medicine.

The American people are not falling for his and the Democratic Party’s socialist sting.

Milton Friedman – Socialized Medicine

Ronald Reagan speaks out on Socialized Medicine – Audio

“Our whole civilization rests on the fact that men have always succeeded in beating off the attack of the re-distributors. But the idea of re-distribution enjoys great popularity still, even in industrial countries. If we wish to save the world from barbarism we have to conquer Socialism, but we cannot thrust it carelessly aside.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Background Articles and Videos

The Swine Flu/Health Care Hoax

Support for Congressional Health Care Reform Falls to New Low

“…Public support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low as just 42% of U.S. voters now favor the plan. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that opposition to the plan has increased to 53%, up nine points since late June.

More significantly, 44% of voters strongly oppose the health care reform effort versus 26% who strongly favor it. Intensity has been stronger among opponents of the plan since the debate began.

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those under 30 favor the plan while 56% of those over 65 are opposed. Among senior citizens, 46% are strongly opposed.

Predictably, 69% of Democrats favor the plan, while 79% of Republicans oppose it. Yet while 44% of Democratic voters strongly favor the reform effort, 70% of GOP voters are strongly opposed to it.
Most notable, however, is the opposition among voters not affiliated with either party. Sixty-two percent (62%) of unaffiliated voters oppose the health care plan, and 51% are strongly opposed. This marks an uptick in strong opposition among both Republicans and unaffiliateds, while the number of strongly supportive Democrats is unchanged. …”

Fact Sheet: America’s Uninsured
The media repeat claims of 40 million to 50 million uninsured Americans, but facts from the Census Bureau and research organizations discredit it.

By Julia A. Seymour
Business & Media Institute

“…The media claim that there are 40 million to 50 million uninsured Americans and use that statistic to bolster calls for universal government-run insurance coverage. The inaccuracy has been repeated by print and broadcast journalists for years, but the true extent of the uninsured “crisis” is much smaller than those reports let on.

Myth:There are between 40 million and 50 million uninsured Americans. President Obama referred to “46 million uninsured Americans” in May 2009.

Fact: Anyone who reports that there are more than 46 million uninsured is exaggerating since the Census Bureau puts the number of uninsured at 45,657,000 people.

Fact: Nearly 10 million (9.7) of the 45.7 million uninsured are “not a citizen.” That makes every media claim of uninsured Americans higher than 35.9 million is wrong.

Fact: More than 17 million of the uninsured make at least $50,000 per year (the median household income of $50,233) – 8.4 million make $50,000 to $74,999 per year and 9.1 million make $75,000 or higher. Two economists working at the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded that25 to 75 percent of those who do not purchase health insurance coverage “could afford to do so.”

Myth: The 40 million to 50 million uninsured do not get health care.

Fact: The National Center for Policy Analysis estimates that uninsured people get about $1,500 of free health care per year, or $6,000 per family of four.

Fact: An Urban Institute study found that 25 percent of the uninsured already qualify for government health insurance programs.

Myth: People will remain uninsured without government assistance.

Fact: The Congressional Budget Office says that 45 percent of the uninsured will be insured within four months. CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin also said that the frequent claim of 40+ million Americans lacking insurance is an “incomplete and potentially misleading picture of the uninsured population.”

Fact: Liberal non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation put the number of uninsured Americans who do not qualify for government programs and make less than $50,000 a year between 8.2 million and 13.9 million. (The 8.2 million figure includes only those uninsured for two years or more.)

Fact: CBO analysis found that 36 million people would remain uninsured even if the Senate’s $1.6 trillion health care plan is passed. …”

List of generations

1900 to present day
Note: The following generations are listed in chronological order, but without specific birth year ranges.

Interbellum Generation – those born at the dawn of the 20th century and who grew up during the 1920s.
The Greatest Generation, the generation of veterans that fought and won World War II. They were born between World War I and the mid-1920s, coming of age during the Great Depression. Journalist Tom Brokaw dubbed this the Greatest Generation in a 1998 book of the same name. [1]
The Silent Generation was the generation who was too young to join the service when World War II started and prior to the end of the war. Many had fathers who served in World War I.
The Baby Boom Generation was the generation born just after World War II, a time that included a 14-year increase in birthrate worldwide. Baby Boomers in their teenage and college years were characteristically part of the counterculture of the 1960s, but later became more ideologically divided, although the generation remained widely committed to keystone values such as gender equality, racial equality, and environmental stewardship.[2]
Generation X is the generation generally defined as those born after the baby boom ended[3], extending from the early-to-mid 1960s to late 1970s. They connected to the pop culture of the 1980s to the early 1990s they grew up in.[4] Other names used interchangeably with Generation X are Reagan Generation, 13th Generation, and Baby Busters. Most of this generation are children of The Baby Boomers and The Silent Generation.

The MTV Generation are typically conceived as a “cusp” generation between Generation X and Generation Y that possess definable traits of both. While the music video and MTV rose to prominence during this generation’s formative period, it is also notable for being the last generation able to compare hardwired and analog technologies to wireless and digital technologies based upon personal experiences. They are also the last generation with personal memories of the Cold War era, and are sometimes called the Cold Y Generation.
The Generation Y, also known as Generation Next or the Millennials, are said to be dependent on digital technology. Generation Y is from 1980 to 1995 although there are no precise dates. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Until Generation Z began to come of age in the late 2000s, Gen Y was often ended around 2000 for convenience, but it is now more common to end Y and begin Z somewhere in the middle of the 1990s.
Generation Z are currently children, nicknamed “the digital natives”, born 1996 to about 2010. They are the generation that will come of age in the 2010s.

Time to ration health care for illegal aliens
By Michelle Malkin

“…I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Big Nanny Democrats want to ration health care for everyone in America – except those who break our immigration laws.

The latest cry for help comes from Nevada’s University Medical Center, via the Las Vegas Review Journal:

“Our people are really torn,” said Brian Brannman, UMC’s chief operating officer. “We want to take care of people who are ill. We’re proud that we can save lives. But our employees are also worried about the survival of UMC. They know that the appetite of taxpayers for helping undocumented immigrants is limited.”

Since April, UMC has been spending about $2 million per month providing emergency dialysis services to 80 illegal immigrants, Brannman said.

He projects that these services at UMC could run more than $24 million in the current fiscal year.

In each of the five prior years, the hospital provided the same emergency services to half as many illegal immigrants for a little more than $1 million per month.

Brannman said the hospital receives no reimbursement from federal, state or local sources to provide this life-saving treatment for people who have entered the country illegally.

But under federal law, any patient who shows up at an emergency department requesting an examination or treatment for a medical condition must be given an appropriate medical screening to determine whether there is an emergency. If there is, treatment must be provided.

“When we’re projecting a budget deficit of $70 million for fiscal year 2010, you can see that $24 million in dialysis treatment that’s not reimbursed is an awfully big chunk,” Brannman said.

UMC health care professionals say discussion of how to reform the nation’s health care system must include how to shore up taxpayer-supported hospitals, strained to the breaking point by following the law to care for those who are breaking it…

…”The federal government kicked the can down the road on the immigration issue and gave the bill to us,” Brannman said. “This is a federal policy failure that is driving huge health care costs to our citizens.”
The solution is not to give them health insurance, but to turn off the magnets that draw them to enter illegally in the first place.

The hospital has reached out to Mexican government officials to try and convince illegal aliens to return home. But “I can’t make them go back,” the Mexican consul in Las Vegas told the Review-Journal.

And the government officials in the United States who do have the power to deport them…won’t. …”

Bill O’Reilly Backs Lou Dobbs, Slams Birthers

Blinded by LIESpt1

Blinded by LIESpt2

Blinded by LIESpt3

Blinded by LIESpt4

Blinded by LIESpt5

Looks like the progressive radical socialists networks including the Southern Poverty Law Center and state media are busy again in fund raising and distracting Americans from President Obama’s failing bailouts, stimulus package, cap and trade energy tax and the health care bills with the public option–the pathway to a single payer government health care monopoly–socialized medicine now and next year a pathway to citizenship–amnesty for illegal aliens .

Blame it all on former President George W. Bush, the anti-government militias and the American people clinging to their guns and religion at townhall meetings.

Give me a break.

Do you really think any one is believing this nonsense.

In September 2009 the unemployment rate will be over 10% with between 15,000,000 to 25,000,000 Americans unemployed.

Where are the jobs Mr. President?

Time to stop and reverse the invasion of the United States by 20,000,000 to 30,000,000 criminal aliens.

Bring the troops home to stop the invasion of our country.

Who needs the militias when you have the Army and Marines!

Unemployment could be cut in half by requiring the use of E-Verify to determine the legal status of all employees to work in the United States.

Lou Dobbs – 2-2-9 – Obama Admin wants to kill E-Verify

Send the criminal aliens home now.

Stop the distractions of looking for anti-government militias.

The American people do not want comprehensive immigration reform, they want comprehensive immigration law enforcement.

The American people do not want a hidden cap and trade energy tax, they want the FairTax.

The American people do not want government compulsory health insurance leading to a single payer socialized medicine government monopoly, they want affordable and portable private individual health insurance plans.

What Is the Free-Market Approach to Health Care Reform?

Background Articles and Videos

Southern Poverty Law Center’s Lucrative ‘Hate Group’ Label

Last week’s shooting at the headquarters of the Family Research Council (FRC) has placed the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) back into the news. The SPLC recently had placed the FRC on its list of hate groups because the SPLC claims that in its opposition to gay marriage, the FRC defames gays and lesbians. It should be noted that the not-for-profit SPLC ostensibly began its mission to help those who had been victimized by civil rights violations by filing suits on their behalf. In recent years, the SPLC greatly expanded its definition of civil rights and hate groups to the point where any organization that opposes the left’s favored causes risks being labeled a hate group by the SPLC. It has also moved away from suing on behalf of the aggrieved to raising awareness of the presence of “hate groups.” Most of all, for the last 35 years, it has become a real fundraising dynamo.

The labeling of opposing political views as hate by the SPLC has become so egregious that at the end of a report on a solidarity march in the Swedish city of Malmö by people protesting attacks on Jews by Islamists, William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection wonders:

Bonus question: Will pointing out the truth about Malmö land me on SPLC’s “hate map” along with Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs?Update: I just noticed that Danel Greenfields’ Sultan Knish also is on SPLC’s NY hate map.

A growing consensus on the political right is to consider being labeled a hate group by the SPLC a badge of honor. I agree that it is, but I take issue with others about what is to be done. When I look at the entire history of the SPLC, I don’t think the recent trend of inflate the hate is as much about political correctness run completely amok in the age of Obama as it is about the greed and self-aggrandizement of the founder of the SPLC and the gullibility of the donor base.

Yes, mock those who increasingly conflate disapproval of policy ideas with hate. It is a silly idea. But mock even more those who continue to donate to SPLC as dupes of pious-sounding con men. Make them doubt their self-image as serious-thinking people by showing that they are being manipulated by a shameless huckster whose principal agenda has always been to become very wealthy. For if you understand that motivation, it is easy to see why the definition of hate had to be expanded to include groups that were considered very mainstream just a short time ago.

SPLC founder Morris Dees is a lawyer, but he began his career as a direct marketer, hawking everything from cookbooks to tractor seat cushions. Indeed, the SPLC was a latecomer to the civil rights movement, as many of the biggest legal and legislative battles had been won before the organization was formed in 1971.

Morris and I, from the first days of our partnership, shared the overriding purpose of making a pile of money. … We were not particular about how we did it. We just wanted to be independently rich. During the eight years we worked together we never wavered in that resolve.

By the mid-60s, Morris was rich. He also became deeply interested in the money side of leftist politics. The initial donor list of the SPLC consisted of those who had contributed to McGovern’s political campaign, because Dees ran that campaign’s direct mail operation and had requested the mailing list as his fee. The Southern-born Dees knew that many of the northern liberals on McGovern’s donor list would get a vicarious thrill from sending a check to the Alabama-based SPLC to fight the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists.

If appealing to some of these rather naive donors meant tarring other Southerners as racist, bigoted hicks, so be it. Dees also raised money for Jimmy Carter in 1976 and wanted to be attorney general, but he and Carter’s people had a falling out. After Carter left office, spokesman Jody Powell made no bones about his disgust with Dees and the use of appeals in SPLC mailings that were intentionally designed to play up to the stereotypes “ignorant Yankee contributors” had about Southerners.

It should also be noted that Millard Fuller took a different course from his erstwhile partner’s. After he sold out to Dees, Fuller donated the money to charity and went on to found Habitat for Humanity. As contributions to the SPLC kept increasing, so did Dees’ salary. Within two decades, he was among the most highly compensated of the heads of advocacy groups, earning much more than the heads of more widely known organizations such as the ACLU, the Children’s Defense Fund, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. That something was seriously rotten at SPLC was noted along with the increases in Dees’ salary. While the SPLC promoted its pursuit of lawsuits related to civil rights, especially those challenging the imposition of the death penalty on black offenders, fundraising was pursued even more fervently. By 1989, an ecumenical guide to charitable giving described the mission of the SPLC as “the aggressive distribution of junk mail, soliciting funds for more junk mail.”

A decade later in Harper’s magazine, a feature titled “The Church of Morris Dees” noted:

Today, the SPLC spends most of its time–and money–on a relentless fund-raising campaign, peddling memberships in the church of tolerance with all the zeal of a circuit rider passing the collection plate. “He’s the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker of the civil rights movement,” renowned anti- death-penalty lawyer Millard Farmer says of Dees, his former associate, “though I don’t mean to malign Jim and Tammy Faye.”

The results of one of the SPLC’s most famous cases as detailed in that article certainly might lead even the most credulous donor to think the aim of the SPLC may have shifted a bit from helping victims of hate to greed and self-aggrandizement.

In 1987, Dees won a $7 million judgment against the United Klans of America on behalf of Beulah Mae Donald, whose son was lynched by two Klansmen. The UKA’s total assets amounted to a warehouse whose sale netted Mrs. Donald $51,875. According to a groundbreaking series of newspaper stories in the Montgomery Advertiser, the SPLC, meanwhile, made $9 million from fund-raising solicitations featuring the case, including one containing a photo of Michael Donald’s corpse.

In what Dees must have seen as icing on the cake, his battles against the fast fading and largely judgment-proof Klan even became the subject of a 1991 made-for-TV movie that depicted him as a huge hero in the civil rights movement. Again, the movie was used to feed the all-important fundraising beast.

The year 1998 saw Dees being inducted into the Direct Marketing Association Hall of Fame, a move that also should have alerted the SPLC donor base that just maybe the SPLC was not quite as cash-strapped as it always represented itself in its frequent solicitations.

Dees’ reputation has long been beyond tarnished inside much of the civil rights bar. In 2007, Atlanta civil rights lawyer Stephen Bright was invited by the University of Alabama Law School to present its Morris Dees Justice Award. Here is what Bright wrote Dean Kenneth C. Randall:

I also received the law school’s invitation to the presentation of the “Morris Dees Justice Award,” which you also mentioned in your letter as one of the “great things” happening at the law school. I decline that invitation for another reason. Morris Dees is a con man and fraud, as I and others, such as U.S. Circuit Judge Cecil Poole, have observed and as has been documented by John Egerton, Harper’s, the Montgomery Advertiser in its “Charity of Riches” series, and others.

The positive contributions Dees has made to justice — most undertaken based upon calculations as to their publicity and fund raising potential — are far overshadowed by what Harper’s described as his “flagrantly misleading” solicitations for money. He has raised millions upon millions of dollars with various schemes, never mentioning that he does not need the money because he has $175 million and two “poverty palace” buildings in Montgomery. He has taken advantage of naive, well-meaning people — some of moderate or low incomes — who believe his pitches and give to his $175-million operation. He has spent most of what they have sent him to raise still more millions, pay high salaries, and promote himself. Because he spends so much on fund raising, his operation spends $30 million a year to accomplish less than what many other organizations accomplish on shoestring budgets.

The award does not recognize the work of others by associating them with Dees; it promotes Dees by associating him with the honorees. Both the law school and Skadden are diminished by being a part of another Dees scam.

None of this has ever seemed to dent the SPLC’s ability to raise money by inflating the influence of what it calls hate groups. But by the late 1980s, a different problem was starting to develop: the Klan was all but dead, and few of the organizations labeled as white supremacists had more than a handful of members.

But this didn’t stop SPLC from using such groups for their direct mailing haul of shame. Still, the original donor base was aging. So during the Clinton administration, the SPLC found Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh a handy substitute for the Klan in its fundraising, despite failures to link his actions to any of the small militia groups the SPLC had earlier identified as hate groups. Eventually that appeal also ran its course, so the SPLC needed to “inflate the hate” by identifying another group as the boogieman for a new generation of naive souls eager to depart with their money for a righteous-sounding cause.

In 2010, Ken Silverstein, the author of the 2000 Harper’s article, noted that the SPLC had found a large new target: those immigration reform groups that supported almost anything more restrictive than amnesty and de facto open borders.

For the record, I am totally opposed to CIS’s stance on immigration, as I stated at the press conference. I accepted the invitation to speak on the panel because it came from my friend Jerry Kammer, of whom I am a big admirer.

I also agreed to the invitation because, much like CIS, I feel that the Law Center is essentially a fraud and that it has a habit of casually labeling organizations as “hate groups.” (Which doesn’t mean that some of the groups it criticizes aren’t reprehensible.) In doing so, the SPLC shuts down debate, stifles free speech, and most of all, raises a pile of money, very little of which is used on behalf of poor people.

Silverstein’s good friend Kammer had this to say about Dees’ manipulative methods as he demolished the SPLC in “Immigration and the SPLC: How the Southern Poverty Law Center Invented a Smear, Served La Raza, Manipulated the Press, and Duped Its Donors.”

While Dees was raised a Southern Baptist, he suggested to some donors that he had a more diverse background. For example, in a 1985 fundraising pitch for funds to protect SPLC staff from threats of Klan violence, Dees made conspicuous use of his middle name – Seligman, which he received in honor of a family friend. A former SPLC attorney told The Progressive magazine that Dees signed letters with his middle name in mailings to zip codes that had many Jewish residents. The article was titled “How Morris Dees Got Rich Fighting the Klan.” A former SPLC employee told the Montgomery Advertiser that the donor base was “anchored by wealthy Jewish contributors on the East and West coasts.”

Attorney Tom Turnipseed, a former Dees associate, told Cox News Service, “Morris loves to raise money. Some of his gimmicks are just so transparent, but they’re good.”

Turnipseed described a fundraising letter whose return envelope carried “about six different stamps.” The purpose of the ruse was to present the appearance of an organization struggling to keep going. As Turnipseed noted: “It was like they had to cobble them all together to come up with 35 cents.”

This shiny thing-a-mabob with the #20 on it is described as “A poolside rickshaw at the home of Morris Dees and Susan Starr in Montgomery, Ala,” because nothing screams Equality! like a fancy rickshaw.

A look at the recent numbers reported by SPLC is highly informative. With net assets of $238 million as of the close of its last fiscal year, the SPLC is among the wealthiest of civil rights and advocacy organizations. Despite this endowment, the SPLC often implies that it is on the verge of cutting back operations vital to the quest for equality and civil rights due to lack of funds. Yet it spends almost 19% of its annual budget on fundraising each year despite the fact its net assets are already an extremely healthy seven times annual expenses. Note that this 19% figure is under cost allocation rules that allow some solicitations to pass as program expenses because educational material is included with the solicitation.

Last year, the SPLC generated a surplus of $4.1 million on revenues of $38.7 million. CEO J. Richard Cohen makes $299K/year, and editor in chief of the SPLC Intelligence Report and Hatewatch blog Mark Potok makes $150K/year. Chief Trial Counsel Morris Dees, age 74, makes $305K/year. I wonder how many hours Dees spent on trial preparation compared to fundraising. The title Dees carries is Chief Trial Counsel, yet his chief bailiwick has always been direct mail marketing.

As the SPLC publicizes the names of ever more hate groups to “raise awareness” of intolerance and to tap into ever new sources of funds, its donors should keep in mind a genuine larger truth. Heightened awareness has never by itself helped the actual victims of anything, anywhere, at any time. At best, it is entirely self-referential. At its worst, it serves as a useful ploy to make a donor who hasn’t done much in the way of due diligence about an organization’s finances feel good about sending money to what appears to be a righteous cause.

The SPLC has more than mastered the exercise of raising awareness. In his 2000 article, Silverstein noted that during its then-29 years of existence, the SPLC had carefully adjusted its operations to fit the needs and self-image of its largely urban, white, and often Jewish donor base. Causes that garnered favorable early media attention but which also risked upsetting some donors, such as filing suits protesting the death penalty, were dropped, even if that meant the mass resignation of staff attorneys. Images of angry blacks and other minorities never appear in solicitations. Nor do concrete issues related to race and poverty get much attention in these appeals. Donors aren’t called on to actually fight to improve housing, improve inner-city schools, or end violence at the borders. Everything is geared to the equal-opportunity and secular sin of being intolerant of those who are different. According to Silverstein, the payoff is also always the same — the SPLC is all about making guilty white donors feel good about themselves for being understanding by writing a check to the wealthy and largely white SPLC. Actual attempts to help the oppressed and downtrodden aren’t just optional. They are almost superfluous.

This is done with a tried-and-true formula Dees learned listening to evangelical preachers as well as TV hucksters. Silverstein writes:

No faith healing or infomercial would be complete without a moving testimonial. The student from whose tears this white schoolteacher learned her lesson is identified only as a child of color. “Which race,” we are assured, “does not matter.” Nor apparently does the specific nature of “the racist acts directed at him,” nor the race of his schoolyard tormentors. All that matters, in fact, is the race of the teacher and those expiating tears. “I wept with him, feeling for once, the depth of his hurt,” she confides. “His tears washed away the film that had distorted my white perspective of the world.” Scales fallen from her eyes, what action does this schoolteacher propose? What Gandhi-like disobedience will she undertake in order to “reach real peace in the world”? She doesn’t say but instead speaks vaguely of acting out against “the pain.” In the age of Oprah and Clinton, empathy — or the confession thereof — is an end in itself.

What matters is that the targets feel they will become part of the solution by writing a check to SPLC. The comparison to Jim and Tammy Faye is really quite apt. The Bakkers always featured the power of the personal testimonial as panacea. The SPLC wants the potential donor to identify with the guilty white teacher. The idea behind Jim Bakker’s testimonials was to get potential donors to identify with the one giving the testimony and not dwell on what actual changes must be made in one’s life to truly get closer to God. Solutions were left intentionally quite vague. And, of course, both the SPLC and the PTL Club offer absolution for sins secular and sacred in nature by means of sinners’ dropping a nice fat check in the mail.

While the formula is timeless, the pitch itself was badly in need of upgrading in the case of the SPLC. It’s been two generations since the civil rights battles of the 1950s and ’60s. America elected a black man president, and while few of the truly intractable social problems relating to race have been solved, those problems are for serious people willing to do real work — not film flam artists writing empty prose for the crowd that prides itself on self-described awareness.

For some time now, the media culture has been suggesting that the battle for gay marriage has its parallels with the civil rights battles. Promoting gay marriage has certainly become a huge cause among the largely secular, affluent coastal elites who make up much of the donor base of the SPLC. It seems the perfect newly fashionable cause to adopt to attract a new generation of marks. Thus, it shouldn’t be surprising to anyone who has followed the history of the SPLC that groups which promote traditional values suddenly find themselves on the SPLC hate map. I guess